[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fafab4f8754a924a97e2115fbd95085dbf918a9b.camel@perches.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:23:05 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <kernel.org@...eddedor>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Use fallthrough pseudo-keyword
On Mon, 2020-08-17 at 15:02 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 03:03:03PM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > Replace the existing /* fall through */ comments and its variants with
> > the new pseudo-keyword macro fallthrough[1]. Also, remove unnecessary
> > fall-through markings when it is the case.
> >
> > [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/deprecated.html?highlight=fallthrough#implicit-switch-case-fall-through
>
> ...
>
> > @@ -362,7 +361,6 @@ static short get_segment_selector(struct pt_regs *regs, int seg_reg_idx)
> > case INAT_SEG_REG_GS:
> > return vm86regs->gs;
> > case INAT_SEG_REG_IGNORE:
> > - /* fall through */
> > default:
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> > @@ -386,7 +384,6 @@ static short get_segment_selector(struct pt_regs *regs, int seg_reg_idx)
> > */
> > return get_user_gs(regs);
> > case INAT_SEG_REG_IGNORE:
> > - /* fall through */
> > default:
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
>
> What's the logic for those two to not get a fallthrough; marker?
consecutive case labels do not need one.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists