[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171022013530.GA15859@embeddedor.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 20:35:30 -0500
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
To: Ursula Braun <ubraun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2] net: smc_close: 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 the "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>
---
Changes in v2:
Move the "fall through" comment on its own line
above the rest of the sentence.
net/smc/smc_close.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/smc/smc_close.c b/net/smc/smc_close.c
index f0d16fb..a6c6559 100644
--- a/net/smc/smc_close.c
+++ b/net/smc/smc_close.c
@@ -360,7 +360,8 @@ static void smc_close_passive_work(struct work_struct *work)
case SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT1:
if (rxflags->peer_done_writing)
sk->sk_state = SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT2;
- /* fall through to check for closing */
+ /* fall through */
+ /* to check for closing */
case SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT2:
case SMC_PEERFINCLOSEWAIT:
if (!smc_cdc_rxed_any_close(&smc->conn))
--
2.7.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists