In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
where we are expecting to fall through.
Notice that in this particular case, I replaced "Pass through." with
"Fall through.", which is what GCC is expecting to find.
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114734 ("Missing break in switch")
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114735 ("Missing break in switch")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gust...@embeddedor.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/r300.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/r300.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/r300.c
index 21161aa..652126f 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/r300.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/r300.c
@@ -814,7 +814,7 @@ static int r300_packet0_check(struct radeon_cs_parser *p,
((idx_value >> 21) & 0xF));
return -EINVAL;
}
- /* Pass through. */
+ /* Fall through. */
case 6:
track->cb[i].cpp = 4;
break;
@@ -965,7 +965,7 @@ static int r300_packet0_check(struct radeon_cs_parser *p,
return -EINVAL;
}
/* The same rules apply as for DXT3/5. */
- /* Pass through. */
+ /* Fall through. */
case R300_TX_FORMAT_DXT3:
case R300_TX_FORMAT_DXT5:
track->textures[i].cpp = 1;
--
2.7.4
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
