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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2017 12:27:40 -0500 From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com> To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> Cc: linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] usb: host: isp1362-hcd: mark expected switch fall-through Quoting Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>: > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 02:05:05PM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >> Greg, >> >> Quoting "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>: >> >> > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases >> > where we are expecting to fall through. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@...eddedor.com> >> > --- >> > drivers/usb/host/isp1362-hcd.c | 1 + >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/isp1362-hcd.c >> b/drivers/usb/host/isp1362-hcd.c >> > index 9b7e307..753d576 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/usb/host/isp1362-hcd.c >> > +++ b/drivers/usb/host/isp1362-hcd.c >> > @@ -1578,6 +1578,7 @@ static int isp1362_hub_control(struct usb_hcd >> > *hcd, u16 typeReq, u16 wValue, >> > spin_lock_irqsave(&isp1362_hcd->lock, flags); >> > isp1362_write_reg32(isp1362_hcd, HCRHSTATUS, RH_HS_OCIC); >> > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&isp1362_hcd->lock, flags); >> > + /* fall through */ >> >> I'm suspicious this should be a 'break' instead. >> >> What do you think? > > Yeah, this should be a 'break', care to make that patch up instead? > Sure thing. Just some questions about the process to follow: Should I send a v2 replying to this particular thread only? like [PATCH v2 6/9] or should I send just a new patch separated from this patch series? I guess this is the case. Some maintainers have told me that in cases where a particular patch in the series needs an update, the complete patchset should be sent again. But I think that depends on the functional impact the patch has over the whole patchset. Thanks -- Gustavo A. R. Silva
Powered by blists - more mailing lists