Hi Marc,
This patch has been in linux-can-next since February, but for some reason
it hasn't been merged into net yet, not even once into linux-next.
I can add it to my tree if you don't mind.
Thanks
--
Gustavo
On 5/8/19 12:30 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> On 2/26/19 2:02 AM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> On 1/29/19 7:06 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
>>> where we are expecting to fall through.
>>>
>>> This patch fixes the following warnings:
>>>
>>> drivers/net/can/peak_canfd/peak_pciefd_main.c:668:3: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> drivers/net/can/spi/mcp251x.c:875:7: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb/pcan_usb.c:422:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> drivers/net/can/at91_can.c:895:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> drivers/net/can/at91_can.c:953:15: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb/pcan_usb.c: In function ‘pcan_usb_decode_error’:
>>> drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb/pcan_usb.c:422:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> if (n & PCAN_USB_ERROR_BUS_LIGHT) {
>>> ^
>>> drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb/pcan_usb.c:428:2: note: here
>>> case CAN_STATE_ERROR_WARNING:
>>> ^~~~
>>>
>>> Warning level 3 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3
>>>
>>> This patch is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling
>>> -Wimplicit-fallthrough.
>>>
>>> Notice that in some cases spelling mistakes were fixed.
>>> In other cases, the /* fall through */ comment is placed
>>> at the bottom of the case statement, which is what GCC
>>> is expecting to find.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Added to linux-can-next.
>>
>
> I wonder if there is any chance for this patch to be queued up for 5.2-rc1.
>
> Thanks
> --
> Gustavo
>
