[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <201905221444.014568B0F4@keescook>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 14:45:15 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: onenand_base: Avoid fall-through warnings
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 11:37:05PM +0200, Boris Brezillon 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 - ? */
>
> So, the only thing that you'll re-use by falling through the next case
> is the '->options |= ONENAND_HAS_UNLOCK_ALL' operation. I find it easier
> to follow with an explicit copy of this line + a break.
>
> >
> > 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 fall through certainly doesn't make sense, as the only thing that
> might be done in the 1Gb case is conditionally adding the
> HAS_UNLOCK_ALL flag, and this flag is already unconditionally set.
> Please add a break here.
>
> >
> > case ONENAND_DEVICE_DENSITY_1Gb:
> > /* A-Die has all block unlock */
>
Your reply was much more to-the-point than mine. :) I'd agree: retain
existing behavior (ONENAND_HAS_UNLOCK_ALL) and add breaks.
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists