linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] afs: Mark expected switch fall-throughs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 02 Aug 2018 10:12:22 +0100
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com, linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] afs: Mark expected switch fall-throughs

Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@...eddedor.com> wrote:

> +		/* Fall through */
>  	no_msw:
>  		/* extract the returned data length */
>  	case 2:

That would appear to be added in the wrong place.  The fall-through is after
the no_msw label.

> +
> +		/* Fall through */
>  	no_volname_padding:

Ditto - and several other dittos too.

> -		/* Done */
> +		/* Fall through - Done */

Yuck.

> +
> +		/* fall through */

Capital 'F' for consistency please.

Whilst I understand the argument for explicitly marking the fall-throughs to
catch missing breaks, it's a bit irritating at times.  Can we have an
additional annotation that tells the compiler that every case in a switch
statement is going to fall through (so no break before case) except the last?
That would be more useful in this case.

David