[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171016102310.kkulrz77gzjgf3qf@pd.tnic>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 12:23:10 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Zhuo, Qiuxu" <qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com>
Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC, sb_edac: mark expected switch fall-through
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 03:00:53AM +0000, Zhuo, Qiuxu wrote:
> Hi Silva,
>
> The actual intention of the code is NOT to fall through, though current code can work correctly.
> Thanks for this finding. If you don't mind, I'll submit a fix patch for it with the tag 'Reported-by:' by you.
I'd prefer if Gustavo would submit a patch fixing that, as he caught it
and I'd prefer if you don't top-post on public mailing lists please.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists