linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xen: 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1c86461d-71b4-7759-2255-19983b888fb5@suse.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Feb 2019 06:50:58 +0100
From:   Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
To:     Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
Cc:     Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen: mark expected switch fall-through

On 13/02/2019 00:50, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 02:37:20PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch
>> cases where we are expecting to fall through.
>>
>> This patch fixes the following warning:
>>
>> drivers/xen/xen-pciback/xenbus.c: In function ‘xen_pcibk_frontend_changed’:
>> drivers/xen/xen-pciback/xenbus.c:545:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>    if (xenbus_dev_is_online(xdev))
>>       ^
>> drivers/xen/xen-pciback/xenbus.c:548:2: note: here
>>   case XenbusStateUnknown:
>>   ^~~~
>>
>> Warning level 3 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3
>>
>> Notice that, in this particular case, the code comment is modified
>> in accordance with what GCC is expecting to find.
>>
>> This patch is part of the ongoing efforts to enable
>> -Wimplicit-fallthrough.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
> 
> Applied to for-linus-5.0
> 
> (xen-scsiback patch too)

I'm tending to delay those patches until 5.1, as we are pretty late in
the 5.0 cycle. We should add only really critical fixes to 5.0 now.


Juergen