[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ae54364041b99b89f818812d957d4a4bb4efdc25.camel@perches.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 19:22:18 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>
Cc: "Kaneda, Erik" <erik.kaneda@...el.com>,
"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:ACPI COMPONENT ARCHITECTURE (ACPICA)" <devel@...ica.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] ACPICA: Use fallthrough pseudo-keyword
On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 17:23 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> This is a macro pseudo-keyword, which expands to /* fallthrough */
> for compilers that don't support the attribute __fallthrough__. See:
Not really.
It expands to
do {} while (0)
for compilers that do not support the __fallthrough__ attribute.
The /* fallthrough */ after that is for the human reader
and is stripped before compilation.
> include/linux/compiler_attributes.h:213:
> 213 #if __has_attribute(__fallthrough__)
> 214 # define fallthrough __attribute__((__fallthrough__))
> 215 #else
> 216 # define fallthrough do {} while (0) /* fallthrough */
> 217 #endif
>
> So, any compiler (older or new) will be fine with it.
But old compilers should not emit warnings for these uses.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists