linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mtd: rawnand: 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]

Date:   Mon, 28 Jan 2019 10:13:44 +0100
From:   Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To:     Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@...nel.org>
Cc:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Wan ZongShun <mcuos.com@...il.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: rawnand: mark expected switch fall-throughs

Hi Boris,

Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@...nel.org> wrote on Sat, 26 Jan 2019
17:54:29 +0100:

> On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 07:48:50 -0600
> "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hey Boris,
> > 
> > On 1/26/19 3:52 AM, Boris Brezillon wrote:  
> > > On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:09:50 -0600
> > > "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com> wrote:
> > >     
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c
> > >> index 933d1a629c51..d33e15dc4cdc 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c
> > >> @@ -2251,9 +2251,10 @@ static int __init ns_init_module(void)
> > >>  
> > >>  	switch (bbt) {
> > >>  	case 2:
> > >> -		 chip->bbt_options |= NAND_BBT_NO_OOB;
> > >> +		chip->bbt_options |= NAND_BBT_NO_OOB;
> > >> +		/* fall through */
> > >>  	case 1:
> > >> -		 chip->bbt_options |= NAND_BBT_USE_FLASH;
> > >> +		chip->bbt_options |= NAND_BBT_USE_FLASH;    
> > > 
> > > You miss a '/* fall through */' here.
> > >     
> > 
> > Not really.  Notice that in this case the code falls through
> > to a break statement.  
> 
> Still find it weird to mandate fall through comments in all cases but
> this one...

Yes please, even if there is no GCC warning I think you can add one
here.


Thanks,
Miquèl