Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:10:20 -0600 > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases > where we are expecting to fall through. > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1465362 ("Missing break in switch") > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A.

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:10:20 -0600 > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases > where we are expecting to fall through. > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1465362 ("Missing break in switch") > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva Applied.

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

On 2/20/2018 10:05 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: Hi Santosh, On 02/20/2018 11:54 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: Hi, 2/19/2018 10:10 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through.

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

On 2/20/2018 10:05 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: Hi Santosh, On 02/20/2018 11:54 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: Hi, 2/19/2018 10:10 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through.

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

On 2/20/2018 10:01 AM, David Miller wrote: From: Santosh Shilimkar Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 09:54:09 -0800 So coverity greps for commet as "fall through" for -Wimplicit-fallthrough build ? From what I understand, 'gcc' does in the latest versions. Coverity

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

On 2/20/2018 10:01 AM, David Miller wrote: From: Santosh Shilimkar Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 09:54:09 -0800 So coverity greps for commet as "fall through" for -Wimplicit-fallthrough build ? From what I understand, 'gcc' does in the latest versions. Coverity might as well, I don't know.

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

On 02/20/2018 12:01 PM, David Miller wrote: From: Santosh Shilimkar Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 09:54:09 -0800 So coverity greps for commet as "fall through" for -Wimplicit-fallthrough build ? From what I understand, 'gcc' does in the latest versions. Coverity

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

On 02/20/2018 12:01 PM, David Miller wrote: From: Santosh Shilimkar Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 09:54:09 -0800 So coverity greps for commet as "fall through" for -Wimplicit-fallthrough build ? From what I understand, 'gcc' does in the latest versions. Coverity might as well, I don't know.

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

Hi Santosh, On 02/20/2018 11:54 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: Hi, 2/19/2018 10:10 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1465362 ("Missing break in switch")

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

Hi Santosh, On 02/20/2018 11:54 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: Hi, 2/19/2018 10:10 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1465362 ("Missing break in switch")

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

From: Santosh Shilimkar Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 09:54:09 -0800 > So coverity greps for commet as "fall through" for > -Wimplicit-fallthrough build ? >From what I understand, 'gcc' does in the latest versions. Coverity might as well, I don't know.

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

From: Santosh Shilimkar Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 09:54:09 -0800 > So coverity greps for commet as "fall through" for > -Wimplicit-fallthrough build ? >From what I understand, 'gcc' does in the latest versions. Coverity might as well, I don't know.

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

Hi, 2/19/2018 10:10 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1465362 ("Missing break in switch") Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva ---

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

Hi, 2/19/2018 10:10 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1465362 ("Missing break in switch") Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva --- net/rds/send.c | 2 ++ 1 file

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

On (02/19/18 12:10), Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases > where we are expecting to fall through. Acked-by: Sowmini Varadhan

Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

On (02/19/18 12:10), Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases > where we are expecting to fall through. Acked-by: Sowmini Varadhan

[PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1465362 ("Missing break in switch") Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva --- net/rds/send.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff

[PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size

In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1465362 ("Missing break in switch") Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva --- net/rds/send.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/net/rds/send.c