On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 05:34:40PM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > 2015-12-01 11:08 GMT-02:00 <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > While not techically needed on the last case in the switch statement, > > "techically" > > > the 'break' makes it look better IMO. > > Just out of curiosity: what's your opinion on the lack of a "break" at > the default case, such as the one we have in bxt_get_ddi_pll()? I think I tend to include the break in all cases, except when I want an explicit fall through, at which point I'd usually put a comment in its place to tell people that I really meant it. If on the hand there's a 'return' involved, I leave out the break since it's dead anyway. But I suspect I fail to follow even my own rules sometimes. > > Reviewed-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > index 29ea4c458ab3..d049b087e8e6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > @@ -9808,6 +9808,7 @@ static void haswell_get_ddi_pll(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > break; > > case PORT_CLK_SEL_SPLL: > > pipe_config->shared_dpll = DPLL_ID_SPLL; > > + break; > > } > > } > > > > -- > > 2.4.10 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Intel-gfx mailing list > > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx > > > > -- > Paulo Zanoni -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
