Rich Baum wrote:
> @@ -1543,6 +1543,7 @@
> EXCEPTION(EX_INTERNAL | 0x116);
> return;
> #endif /* PARANOID */
> + ;
> }
> }
> else if ( (st0_tag == TAG_Valid) || (st0_tag == TW_Denormal) )
> @@ -437,7 +437,7 @@
> /* XXX shouldn't we *start* by deregistering the device? */
> atm_dev_deregister(fore200e->atm_dev);
>
> - case FORE200E_STATE_BLANK:
> + case FORE200E_STATE_BLANK:;
> /* nothing to do for that state */
> }
> }
> @@ -556,7 +556,7 @@
> }
> break;
> #endif
> - default:
> + default:;
> /* nothing */
> }
>
IMHO the ":;" form is really easy to miss or mistake.
Can't you put a "break;" after the "nothing" comment instead? The
compiled code is not bigger, and while the source gets a bit bigger, I
think the extra "break;" helps maintenance in the long term.
Jeff
--
Jeff Garzik | Game called on account of naked chick
Building 1024 |
MandrakeSoft |
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
