linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ALSA: intel8x0: Fix fall-through annotations

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]

Date:   Wed, 3 Oct 2018 20:40:18 +0200
From:   "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To:     Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc:     Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ALSA: intel8x0: Fix fall-through annotations



On 10/3/18 8:34 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>>
>> You are correct. It does not trigger a warning.
>>
>> There are about 50 similar instances in the whole codebase. And, as they
>> are just a few, what I'm trying to do is to replace them with the most
>> commonly used form: "fall through"
> 
> Hm, then I'm not sure whether it's worth for further similar
> replacements.  A term "fallthru" is also very commonly used, and the
> compiler knows it, too, so why bother to rewrite?
> 

Not that common actually. There are more than 2000 instances of "fall through"
and just ~50 of "fallthru" and ~40 of "fall thru"

> I don't mean to revert the already applied changes, but maybe better
> to concentrate on fixing other real bugs (and/or real warnings).
> 

Yeah. Sure thing. It's just that I sort of ran into those cases a few days ago.

Thanks
--
Gustavo