[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXyn6MYETdCAueXSKDeZXGxN2JJWX7bsE8QiUZNveeDfg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 17:10:45 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: gustavo@...eddedor.com
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: slave: Fix missing break in switch
Hi Gustavo,
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 5:05 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva
<gustavo@...eddedor.com> wrote:
> On 10/3/18 5:01 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 04:46:45PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 2:57 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva
> >
> >>> case CMD_REBOOT:
> >>> dev_info(&priv->spi->dev, "Rebooting system...\n");
> >>> kernel_restart(NULL);
> >>> + break;
> >
> >> Alternatively, kernel_restart() and friends could be marked __noreturn.
> >
> > Yes, that seems more sensible though there's no harm in this patch even
> > with that. It'd definitely avoid other issues in future.
>
> I'll include the __noreturn in addition to the break statement.
> I'll send v2 shortly.
Please note that adding __noreturn is not a trivial task, due to the complex
call chains, and the different implementations on the various architectures
and platforms. So that will be a big patch series.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists