linux-kernel - [PATCH 3.16 257/294] netfilter: Fix switch statement warnings with recent gcc.

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

Message-ID: <lsq.1510009382.954651030@decadent.org.uk>
Date:   Mon, 06 Nov 2017 23:03:02 +0000
From:   Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
CC:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "Pablo Neira Ayuso" <pablo@...filter.org>,
        "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [PATCH 3.16 257/294] netfilter: Fix switch statement warnings
 with recent gcc.

3.16.50-rc1 review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>

commit c1f866767777d1c6abae0ec57effffcb72017c00 upstream.

More recent GCC warns about two kinds of switch statement uses:

1) Switching on an enumeration, but not having an explicit case
   statement for all members of the enumeration.  To show the
   compiler this is intentional, we simply add a default case
   with nothing more than a break statement.

2) Switching on a boolean value.  I think this warning is dumb
   but nevertheless you get it wholesale with -Wswitch.

This patch cures all such warnings in netfilter.

Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Acked-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
---
 net/ipv4/netfilter/nft_reject_ipv4.c | 2 ++
 net/ipv6/netfilter/nft_reject_ipv6.c | 2 ++
 net/netfilter/nft_compat.c           | 6 +++---
 net/netfilter/nft_ct.c               | 8 ++++++++
 4 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

--- a/net/ipv4/netfilter/nft_reject_ipv4.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/netfilter/nft_reject_ipv4.c
@@ -33,6 +33,8 @@ void nft_reject_ipv4_eval(const struct n
 	case NFT_REJECT_TCP_RST:
 		nf_send_reset(pkt->skb, pkt->ops->hooknum);
 		break;
+	default:
+		break;
 	}
 
 	data[NFT_REG_VERDICT].verdict = NF_DROP;
--- a/net/ipv6/netfilter/nft_reject_ipv6.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/netfilter/nft_reject_ipv6.c
@@ -34,6 +34,8 @@ void nft_reject_ipv6_eval(const struct n
 	case NFT_REJECT_TCP_RST:
 		nf_send_reset6(net, pkt->skb, pkt->ops->hooknum);
 		break;
+	default:
+		break;
 	}
 
 	data[NFT_REG_VERDICT].verdict = NF_DROP;
--- a/net/netfilter/nft_compat.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/nft_compat.c
@@ -295,11 +295,11 @@ static void nft_match_eval(const struct
 		return;
 	}
 
-	switch(ret) {
-	case true:
+	switch (ret ? 1 : 0) {
+	case 1:
 		data[NFT_REG_VERDICT].verdict = NFT_CONTINUE;
 		break;
-	case false:
+	case 0:
 		data[NFT_REG_VERDICT].verdict = NFT_BREAK;
 		break;
 	}
--- a/net/netfilter/nft_ct.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/nft_ct.c
@@ -56,6 +56,8 @@ static void nft_ct_get_eval(const struct
 			state = NF_CT_STATE_BIT(ctinfo);
 		dest->data[0] = state;
 		return;
+	default:
+		break;
 	}
 
 	if (ct == NULL)
@@ -117,6 +119,8 @@ static void nft_ct_get_eval(const struct
 		return;
 	}
 #endif
+	default:
+		break;
 	}
 
 	tuple = &ct->tuplehash[priv->dir].tuple;
@@ -141,6 +145,8 @@ static void nft_ct_get_eval(const struct
 	case NFT_CT_PROTO_DST:
 		dest->data[0] = (__force __u16)tuple->dst.u.all;
 		return;
+	default:
+		break;
 	}
 	return;
 err:
@@ -172,6 +178,8 @@ static void nft_ct_set_eval(const struct
 		}
 		break;
 #endif
+	default:
+		break;
 	}
 }