Re: [PATCH] rtc: m41t80: fix fall-through annotation
On 10/4/18 2:53 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > Hi, > > On 04/10/2018 14:35:28+0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >> Replace "Fall" with a proper "Fall through" annotation. >> >> This fix is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling >> -Wimplicit-fallthrough >> > > Can we agree that this is absolutely not a fix? I don't wan't to have > that needlessly backport on gazillion stable kernel. > Well, as clearly the intention of the developer was to add a fall-through comment, but it was incomplete, I considered this a fix. But, I see your point and I agree. There is not need for this to be applied to stable trees. I will change the subject. Thanks -- Gustavo
Re: [PATCH] rtc: m41t80: fix fall-through annotation
On 10/4/18 2:53 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > Hi, > > On 04/10/2018 14:35:28+0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >> Replace "Fall" with a proper "Fall through" annotation. >> >> This fix is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling >> -Wimplicit-fallthrough >> > > Can we agree that this is absolutely not a fix? I don't wan't to have > that needlessly backport on gazillion stable kernel. > Well, as clearly the intention of the developer was to add a fall-through comment, but it was incomplete, I considered this a fix. But, I see your point and I agree. There is not need for this to be applied to stable trees. I will change the subject. Thanks -- Gustavo
Re: [PATCH] rtc: m41t80: fix fall-through annotation
Hi,
On 04/10/2018 14:35:28+0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Replace "Fall" with a proper "Fall through" annotation.
>
> This fix is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling
> -Wimplicit-fallthrough
>
Can we agree that this is absolutely not a fix? I don't wan't to have
that needlessly backport on gazillion stable kernel.
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373875 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c
> index ad03e2f..a3fb235 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c
> @@ -745,7 +745,7 @@ static int wdt_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
> return -EINVAL;
> wdt_margin = new_margin;
> wdt_ping();
> - /* Fall */
> + /* Fall through */
> case WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT:
> return put_user(wdt_margin, (int __user *)arg);
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>
--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
Re: [PATCH] rtc: m41t80: fix fall-through annotation
Hi,
On 04/10/2018 14:35:28+0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Replace "Fall" with a proper "Fall through" annotation.
>
> This fix is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling
> -Wimplicit-fallthrough
>
Can we agree that this is absolutely not a fix? I don't wan't to have
that needlessly backport on gazillion stable kernel.
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373875 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c
> index ad03e2f..a3fb235 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c
> @@ -745,7 +745,7 @@ static int wdt_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
> return -EINVAL;
> wdt_margin = new_margin;
> wdt_ping();
> - /* Fall */
> + /* Fall through */
> case WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT:
> return put_user(wdt_margin, (int __user *)arg);
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>
--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
