On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 10:06:08PM +0000, Patel, Vedang wrote:
> After pondering a little bit more, I think that switch/case is not suitable
> in this scenario. The current we switch/case is implemented is as follows:
>
> switch (*state) {
> case SERVO_UNLOCKED:
> servo->curr_offset_values = servo->num_offset_values;
> break;
> case SERVO_LOCKED:
> if (check_offset_threshold(servo, offset)) {
> *state = SERVO_LOCKED_STABLE;
> }
> /* fall through. */
> case SERVO_JUMP:
> servo->first_update = 0;
> break;
> case SERVO_LOCKED_STABLE:
> break;
> }
>
> But, here SERVO_LOCKED_STABLE case will never occur.
Even if it is a noop, still enumerating the cases is clearer to me.
You could add a comment explaining why that case is never reached.
Thanks,
Richard
_______________________________________________
Linuxptp-devel mailing list
Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
