Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Reword warning for missing cases

2018-03-27 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 09:41:32PM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Lucas De Marchi (2018-03-19 17:37:20) > > In some places we end up converting switch statements to a series of > > if/else, particularly when introducing helper functions to handle a > > group of cases. It's tempting to either

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Reword warning for missing cases

2018-03-19 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Lucas De Marchi (2018-03-19 17:37:20) > In some places we end up converting switch statements to a series of > if/else, particularly when introducing helper functions to handle a > group of cases. It's tempting to either leave a wrong warning (since now > we don't have a switch case

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Reword warning for missing cases

2018-03-19 Thread Lucas De Marchi
In some places we end up converting switch statements to a series of if/else, particularly when introducing helper functions to handle a group of cases. It's tempting to either leave a wrong warning (since now we don't have a switch case anymore) or to convert to WARN(1, ...), but we can just