On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 11:41:56AM +0200, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > On 22/10/2018 00:27, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 07:14:13PM +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > >> From the GCC manual: > >> > >> fallthrough > >> > >> The fallthrough attribute with a null statement serves as a > >> fallthrough statement. It hints to the compiler that a statement > >> that falls through to another case label, or user-defined label > >> in a switch statement is intentional and thus the -Wimplicit-fallthrough > >> warning must not trigger. The fallthrough attribute may appear > >> at most once in each attribute list, and may not be mixed with > >> other attributes. It can only be used in a switch statement > >> (the compiler will issue an error otherwise), after a preceding > >> statement and before a logically succeeding case label, > >> or user-defined label. > >> > >> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Statement-Attributes.html > > > > Do we know if coverity understands the fallthrough attribute? One of > > the reasons why I started using /* fallthrough */ is because it kept > > Coverity happy. > > FWIW, current "eclipse" has the same "problem". > > > If the conversion from /* fallthrough */ to the __fallthrough__ > > attribute means that we start gethting a lot of Coverity warnings, > > We could keep both. What does that even mean? Use both the attribute and the comment until Eclipse is updated? case 3: frob(); __fall_through; /* fall through */ case 4: That seems like a wrong idea... regards, dan carpenter
