[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6DD009123C@AcuExch.aculab.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:54:24 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Joe Perches' <joe@...ches.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>,
Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@...il.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
CC: "linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <acme@...radead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] rtl8xxxu: mark expected switch fall-throughs
From: Joe Perches
> Sent: 11 October 2017 11:21
> On Tue, 2017-10-10 at 14:30 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> > where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> perhaps use Arnaldo's idea:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/2/9/845
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/2/10/485
gah, that is even uglier and requires a chase through
headers to find out what it means.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists