[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1387004267.2276.7.camel@joe-AO722>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 22:57:47 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Yuval Mintz <yuvalmin@...adcom.com>
Cc: Ariel Elior <ariele@...adcom.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: bnx2x_sriov.c: Missing switch/case breaks?
On Sat, 2013-12-14 at 06:16 +0000, Yuval Mintz wrote:
> > Hi Ariel.
> >
> > I wrote a little checkpatch script to look for missing
> > switch/case breaks.
> >
> > http://www.kernelhub.org/?msg=379933&p=2
> >
> > There are _many_ instances of case blocks in sriov.c
> > that could be missing breaks as they use fall-throughs.
> >
> > It would be good if these are actually intended to be
> > fall-throughs to add a /* fall-through */ comment between
> > each case block.
> >
> > For instance:
> >
> > static void bnx2x_vfop_qctor(struct bnx2x *bp, struct bnx2x_virtf *vf)
> > {
> > [...]
> > switch (state) {
> > case BNX2X_VFOP_QCTOR_INIT:
> >
> > /* has this queue already been opened? */
> > if (bnx2x_get_q_logical_state(bp, q_params->q_obj) ==
> > BNX2X_Q_LOGICAL_STATE_ACTIVE) {
> > DP(BNX2X_MSG_IOV,
> > "Entered qctor but queue was already up. Aborting
> > gracefully\n");
> > goto op_done;
> > }
> >
> > /* next state */
> > vfop->state = BNX2X_VFOP_QCTOR_SETUP;
> >
> > q_params->cmd = BNX2X_Q_CMD_INIT;
> > vfop->rc = bnx2x_queue_state_change(bp, q_params);
> >
> > bnx2x_vfop_finalize(vf, vfop->rc, VFOP_CONT);
>
> Hi Joe,
Hi Yuval.
> The `vfop' part of the code contains a lot of usage of the `bnx2x_vfop_finalize()',
> which either goto or return at the end of almost every case.
> "Normal" analysis tools/scripts fail to recognize them as valid case breaks.
>
> Adding `fallthrough' comments would make little sense, as this is not the real
> behavior; Perhaps we need some alternative comment? (something in the line
> of `macro case break')
No idea. It's certainly an ugly macro.
This does have a fallthrough path though when
(rc == 0 && next == VFOP_VERIFY_PEND) so
maybe there should be a break after most all
uses of this macro anyway. When next is
VFOP_VERIFY_PEND, then a "fall-through" comment
would be appropriate.
cheers, Joe
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h:#define bnx2x_vfop_finalize(vf, rc, next) do { \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- if ((rc) < 0) \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- goto op_err; \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- else if ((rc) > 0) \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- goto op_pending; \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- else if ((next) == VFOP_DONE) \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- goto op_done; \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- else if ((next) == VFOP_VERIFY_PEND) \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- BNX2X_ERR("expected pending\n"); \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- else { \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- DP(BNX2X_MSG_IOV, "no ramrod. Scheduling\n"); \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- atomic_set(&vf->op_in_progress, 1); \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- queue_delayed_work(bnx2x_wq, &bp->sp_task, 0); \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- return; \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- } \
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h- } while (0)
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_sriov.h-
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists