[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <73c80979-da30-c7f5-eeac-9182076df023@embeddedor.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 07:33:40 -0500
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] afs: Remove erroneous fallthough annotation
On 8/26/20 06:32, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> The fall through annotation comes after a return statement so it's not
> reachable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Reviewed-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@...nel.org>
Thanks
--
Gustavo
> ---
> fs/afs/flock.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/afs/flock.c b/fs/afs/flock.c
> index eff82a6839e4..cb3054c7843e 100644
> --- a/fs/afs/flock.c
> +++ b/fs/afs/flock.c
> @@ -376,7 +376,6 @@ void afs_lock_work(struct work_struct *work)
> spin_unlock(&vnode->lock);
> return;
>
> - fallthrough;
> default:
> /* Looks like a lock request was withdrawn. */
> spin_unlock(&vnode->lock);
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists