On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 10:51:27AM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1292308 ("Missing break in switch")
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1292309 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: baytrail: Mark expected switch fall-throughs
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: baytrail: Mark expected switch fall-throughs
- From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2018 09:15:31 +0300
- In-reply-to: <20180705155127.GA1458@embeddedor.com>
- Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
- References: <20180705155127.GA1458@embeddedor.com>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17)
- References:
- [PATCH] pinctrl: baytrail: Mark expected switch fall-throughs
- From: Gustavo A. R. Silva
- [PATCH] pinctrl: baytrail: Mark expected switch fall-throughs
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: Defer on non-DT find_chip_by_name() failure
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: Defer on non-DT find_chip_by_name() failure
- Previous by thread: [PATCH] pinctrl: baytrail: Mark expected switch fall-throughs
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: baytrail: Mark expected switch fall-throughs
- Index(es):
 |