linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 12/41] scsi: bfa: bfa_ioc: Mark expected switch fall-throughs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 10 Jan 2019 14:11:26 -0600
From:   "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To:     Anil Gurumurthy <anil.gurumurthy@...gic.com>,
        Sudarsana Kalluru <sudarsana.kalluru@...gic.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 12/41] scsi: bfa: bfa_ioc: Mark expected switch
 fall-throughs

Hi,

Friendly ping (second one):

Who can ack/review/take this patch, please?

Thanks
--
Gustavo

On 12/19/18 9:39 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Friendly ping:
> 
> Who can ack or review this patch, please?
> 
> Thanks
> -- 
> Gustavo
> 
> On 11/27/18 10:27 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, I replaced "!!! fall through !!!"
>> comment with "fall through" annotations, which is what GCC is expecting
>> to find.
>>
>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 146155 ("Missing break in switch")
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_ioc.c | 9 +++------
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_ioc.c b/drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_ioc.c
>> index 16d3aeb0e572..32b24e51cce6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_ioc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_ioc.c
>> @@ -978,9 +978,7 @@ bfa_iocpf_sm_enabling(struct bfa_iocpf_s *iocpf, enum iocpf_event event)
>>       case IOCPF_E_INITFAIL:
>>           bfa_iocpf_timer_stop(ioc);
>> -        /*
>> -         * !!! fall through !!!
>> -         */
>> +        /* fall through */
>>       case IOCPF_E_TIMEOUT:
>>           writel(1, ioc->ioc_regs.ioc_sem_reg);
>> @@ -1056,9 +1054,7 @@ bfa_iocpf_sm_disabling(struct bfa_iocpf_s *iocpf, enum iocpf_event event)
>>       case IOCPF_E_FAIL:
>>           bfa_iocpf_timer_stop(ioc);
>> -        /*
>> -         * !!! fall through !!!
>> -         */
>> +        /* fall through */
>>       case IOCPF_E_TIMEOUT:
>>           bfa_ioc_set_cur_ioc_fwstate(ioc, BFI_IOC_FAIL);
>> @@ -6007,6 +6003,7 @@ bfa_dconf_sm_final_sync(struct bfa_dconf_mod_s *dconf,
>>       case BFA_DCONF_SM_IOCDISABLE:
>>       case BFA_DCONF_SM_FLASH_COMP:
>>           bfa_timer_stop(&dconf->timer);
>> +        /* fall through */
>>       case BFA_DCONF_SM_TIMEOUT:
>>           bfa_sm_set_state(dconf, bfa_dconf_sm_uninit);
>>           bfa_fsm_send_event(&dconf->bfa->iocfc, IOCFC_E_DCONF_DONE);
>>