[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171019175503.GA28691@embeddedor.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 12:55:03 -0500
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
To: Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, dev@...nvswitch.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
Subject: [PATCH] openvswitch: conntrack: mark expected switch fall-through
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
where we are expecting to fall through.
Notice that in this particular case I placed a "fall through" comment on
its own line, which is what GCC is expecting to find.
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
---
net/openvswitch/conntrack.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/net/openvswitch/conntrack.c b/net/openvswitch/conntrack.c
index fe861e2..b27c5c6 100644
--- a/net/openvswitch/conntrack.c
+++ b/net/openvswitch/conntrack.c
@@ -752,6 +752,7 @@ static int ovs_ct_nat_execute(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nf_conn *ct,
}
}
/* Non-ICMP, fall thru to initialize if needed. */
+ /* fall through */
case IP_CT_NEW:
/* Seen it before? This can happen for loopback, retrans,
* or local packets.
--
2.7.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists