On 08/03/2018 11:45 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 11:41:39AM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >> On 08/03/2018 11:26 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>> On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 14:56:16 -0500, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" said: > >>> Wait, what? This looks like the sort of bug -Wimplicit-fallthrough is >>> supposed >>> to catch. Unless for 'case WM8994_SYSCLK_OPCLK:' we actually do want to do >>> a >>> whole bunch of snd_soc_component_update_bits() calls and then return -EINVAL >>> whether or not that case succeeded? > >> Yeah, it seems like a bug. Can someone confirm this? > >> Notice that this code has been there since 2010. > > Basically nobody ever uses OPCLK so I'd be susprised if anyone ever > noticed. > I see. I wonder what's the best approach in this case. Should that code be removed instead of 'fixed'? Thanks -- Gustavo
- [PATCH 05/11] ASoC: wm8960: Mark expected switch fall-... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- [PATCH 06/11] ASoC: wm8904: Mark expected switch fall-... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- [PATCH 07/11] ASoC: wm8996: Mark expected switch fall-... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- [PATCH 08/11] ASoC: wm8962: Mark expected switch fall-... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- [PATCH 10/11] ASoC: wm9081: Mark expected switch fall-... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- [PATCH 09/11] ASoC: wm8995: Mark expected switch fall-... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm8994: Mark expected switch fall-... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- Re: [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm8994: Mark expected swi... valdis . kletnieks
- Re: [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm8994: Mark expected... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- Re: [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm8994: Mark expe... Mark Brown
- Re: [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm8994: Mark ... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- Re: [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm8994: ... valdis . kletnieks
- Re: [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm89... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- Re: [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm89... Mark Brown
- Re: [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm89... Gustavo A. R. Silva
- Re: [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm89... Mark Brown
- Re: [PATCH 11/11] ASoC: wm89... Gustavo A. R. Silva

