linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 20/41] scsi: isci: request: mark expected switch fall-through

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: <f70b101e-2c97-b297-5247-fa8acddf8baf@embeddedor.com>
Date:   Wed, 19 Dec 2018 16:27:06 -0600
From:   "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To:     Intel SCU Linux support <intel-linux-scu@...el.com>,
        Artur Paszkiewicz <artur.paszkiewicz@...el.com>
Cc:     "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/41] scsi: isci: request: mark expected switch
 fall-through

Hi,

Friendly ping:

Who can ack or review this patch, please?

Thanks
-- 
Gustavo

On 11/27/18 10:30 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
> 
> Notice that, in this particular case, a dash is added as a token in
> order to separate the "Fall through" annotation from the rest of the
> comment on the same line, which is what GCC is expecting to find.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
> ---
>   drivers/scsi/isci/request.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/isci/request.c b/drivers/scsi/isci/request.c
> index 2f151708b59a..1b18cf55167e 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/isci/request.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/isci/request.c
> @@ -894,7 +894,7 @@ sci_io_request_terminate(struct isci_request *ireq)
>   		 * and don't wait for the task response.
>   		 */
>   		sci_change_state(&ireq->sm, SCI_REQ_ABORTING);
> -		/* Fall through and handle like ABORTING... */
> +		/* Fall through - and handle like ABORTING... */
>   	case SCI_REQ_ABORTING:
>   		if (!isci_remote_device_is_safe_to_abort(ireq->target_device))
>   			set_bit(IREQ_PENDING_ABORT, &ireq->flags);
>