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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 17 Feb 2020 09:33:58 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
Cc:     Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>, Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>,
        kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: host: fhci-hcd: annotate PIPE_CONTROL switch case
 with fallthrough

On Mon, 2020-02-17 at 11:12 -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> 
> On 2/13/20 06:56, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 09:54:00AM +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> > > After this was made buildable for something other than PPC32, kbuild
> > > starts warning
> > > 
> > > drivers/usb/host/fhci-hcd.c:398:8: warning: this statement may fall
> > > through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
> > > 
> > > I don't know this code, but from the construction (initializing size
> > > with 0 and explicitly using "size +=" in the PIPE_BULK case) I assume
> > > that fallthrough is indeed intended.
> > > 
> > > Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> > > Fixes: 5a35435ef4e6 (soc: fsl: qe: remove PPC32 dependency from CONFIG_QUICC_ENGINE)
> > > Fixes: a035d552a93b (Makefile: Globally enable fall-through warning)
> 
> By the way, the "Fixes" tag above makes no sense. There is nothing wrong about
> that commit. It just enabled the fall-through warning globally. Why would you
> "fix" that?"

There could be some effort made to better specify when "Fixes:"
tags should be used.

Right now the "Fixes:" tag is used far too often for changes
like
whitespace only or trivial typos corrections.

And those changes can get backported.

I believe "Fixes:" should be used only when changes have some
runtime impact.  "Fixes:" should not be used for changes that
just silence compiler warnings using W=<123>.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists