[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181005095457.GA21116@embeddedor.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 11:54:57 +0200
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To: Alex Dubov <oakad@...oo.com>, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
Subject: [PATCH] mmc: tifm_sd: Mark expected switch fall-through
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
where we are expecting to fall through.
Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the
"deliberate fall-through" comment with a proper "fall through"
at the bottom of the case, which is what GCC is expecting to find.
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373887 ("Missing break in switch")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
---
drivers/mmc/host/tifm_sd.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/tifm_sd.c b/drivers/mmc/host/tifm_sd.c
index a3d8380..b6644ce 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/tifm_sd.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/tifm_sd.c
@@ -336,7 +336,8 @@ static unsigned int tifm_sd_op_flags(struct mmc_command *cmd)
rc |= TIFM_MMCSD_RSP_R0;
break;
case MMC_RSP_R1B:
- rc |= TIFM_MMCSD_RSP_BUSY; // deliberate fall-through
+ rc |= TIFM_MMCSD_RSP_BUSY;
+ /* fall-through */
case MMC_RSP_R1:
rc |= TIFM_MMCSD_RSP_R1;
break;
--
2.7.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists