linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BYAPR04MB45022D08A83F69712FEC0D95869A0@BYAPR04MB4502.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Jan 2019 04:54:50 +0000
From:   Chaitanya Kulkarni <Chaitanya.Kulkarni@....com>
To:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
        Philipp Reisner <philipp.reisner@...bit.com>,
        Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@...bit.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Joshua Morris <josh.h.morris@...ibm.com>,
        Philip Kelleher <pjk1939@...ux.ibm.com>
CC:     "drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com" <drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com>,
        "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Mark expected switch fall-throughs


Looks good.

Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanya.kulkarni@....com>




From: linux-block-owner@...r.kernel.org <linux-block-owner@...r.kernel.org> on behalf of Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2019 10:45 PM
To: Philipp Reisner; Lars Ellenberg; Jens Axboe; Joshua Morris; Philip Kelleher
Cc: drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com; linux-block@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Gustavo A. R. Silva
Subject: [PATCH] block: Mark expected switch fall-throughs
  
 
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
where we are expecting to fall through.

This patch fixes the following warnings:

drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h:1774:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h:1774:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h:1774:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h:1774:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h:1774:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c:3093:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c:3120:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:856:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]

Warning level 3 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3

This patch is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling
-Wimplicit-fallthrough

Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
---
 drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h      | 2 +-
 drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c | 4 ++--
 drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c      | 2 +-
 drivers/block/rsxx/core.c          | 1 +
 4 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h
index 000a2f4c0e92..f070f7200fc0 100644
--- a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h
+++ b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h
@@ -1778,7 +1778,7 @@ static inline void __drbd_chk_io_error_(struct drbd_device *device,
                                 _drbd_set_state(_NS(device, disk, D_INCONSISTENT), CS_HARD, NULL);
                         break;
                 }
-               /* NOTE fall through for DRBD_META_IO_ERROR or DRBD_FORCE_DETACH */
+               /* fall through - for DRBD_META_IO_ERROR or DRBD_FORCE_DETACH */
         case EP_DETACH:
         case EP_CALL_HELPER:
                 /* Remember whether we saw a READ or WRITE error.
diff --git a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c
index c7ad88d91a09..74350663443f 100644
--- a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c
+++ b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c
@@ -3094,7 +3094,7 @@ static int drbd_asb_recover_0p(struct drbd_peer_device *peer_device) __must_hold
                         rv =  1;
                         break;
                 }
-               /* Else fall through to one of the other strategies... */
+               /* Else fall through - to one of the other strategies... */
         case ASB_DISCARD_OLDER_PRI:
                 if (self == 0 && peer == 1) {
                         rv = 1;
@@ -3119,7 +3119,7 @@ static int drbd_asb_recover_0p(struct drbd_peer_device *peer_device) __must_hold
                 }
                 if (after_sb_0p == ASB_DISCARD_ZERO_CHG)
                         break;
-               /* else: fall through */
+               /* else, fall through */
         case ASB_DISCARD_LEAST_CHG:
                 if      (ch_self < ch_peer)
                         rv = -1;
diff --git a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c
index 643a04af213b..3809c7e6be8c 100644
--- a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c
+++ b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c
@@ -866,7 +866,7 @@ int __req_mod(struct drbd_request *req, enum drbd_req_event what,
                         } /* else: FIXME can this happen? */
                         break;
                 }
-               /* else, fall through to BARRIER_ACKED */
+               /* else, fall through - to BARRIER_ACKED */
 
         case BARRIER_ACKED:
                 /* barrier ack for READ requests does not make sense */
diff --git a/drivers/block/rsxx/core.c b/drivers/block/rsxx/core.c
index 0cf4509d575c..898d522e8338 100644
--- a/drivers/block/rsxx/core.c
+++ b/drivers/block/rsxx/core.c
@@ -439,6 +439,7 @@ static void card_state_change(struct rsxx_cardinfo *card,
                  * Fall through so the DMA devices can be attached and
                  * the user can attempt to pull off their data.
                  */
+               /* fall through */
         case CARD_STATE_GOOD:
                 st = rsxx_get_card_size8(card, &card->size8);
                 if (st)
-- 
2.20.1