[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ce33f949-48c8-b32a-028e-ee68afc08e8f@embeddedor.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 13:30:31 -0500
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@...nel.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
Wan ZongShun <mcuos.com@...il.com>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: rawnand: mark expected switch fall-throughs
Hi Miquel,
On 2/5/19 6:55 AM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
[..]
>> @@ -3280,12 +3280,14 @@ static void onenand_check_features(struct mtd_info *mtd)
>> if ((this->version_id & 0xf) == 0xe)
>> this->options |= ONENAND_HAS_NOP_1;
>> }
>> + /* fall through */
>>
>> case ONENAND_DEVICE_DENSITY_2Gb:
>> /* 2Gb DDP does not have 2 plane */
>> if (!ONENAND_IS_DDP(this))
>> this->options |= ONENAND_HAS_2PLANE;
>> this->options |= ONENAND_HAS_UNLOCK_ALL;
>> + /* fall through */
>
> This looks strange.
>
> In ONENAND_DEVICE_DENSITY_2Gb:
> ONENAND_HAS_UNLOCK_ALL is set unconditionally.
>
> But then, under ONENAND_DEVICE_DENSITY_1Gb, the same option is set only
> if process is evaluated to true.
>
> Same problem with ONENAND_HAS_2PLANE:
> - it is set in ONENAND_DEVICE_DENSITY_4Gb only if ONENAND_IS_DDP()
> - it is unset in ONENAND_DEVICE_DENSITY_2Gb only if !ONENAND_IS_DDP()
>
> Maybe this portion should be reworked because I am unsure if this is a
> missing fall through or a bug.
>
I wonder if you had the chance to take a look into this piece of code.
Thanks
--
Gustavo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists