linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] 9p: fix spelling mistake in fall-through annotation

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180903222934.GA25084@nautica>
Date:   Tue, 4 Sep 2018 00:29:34 +0200
From:   Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
To:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
Cc:     Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...il.com>,
        Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@...kov.net>,
        v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 9p: fix spelling mistake in fall-through annotation

Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote on Mon, Sep 03, 2018:
> Replace "fallthough" with a proper "fall through" annotation.
> 
> This fix is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough
> 
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 402012 ("Missing break in switch")

I'm not a fan of these, as each coverity instance has their own ID, and
I have no idea if there is an "official" coverity for the linux
kernel -- is there?

(Well, I see many patches got landed with that, so I guess there would
be)

> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@...eddedor.com>

I'll take this, thanks.

-- 
Dominique