print_usage_exit(0) never returns, but the compiler doesn't understand
this. In any case it is not harmful to add a break after this statement.
Do so to keep the unhelpful compiler warning from triggering.
Signed-off-by: John Kacur <jkacur@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
src/hackbench/hackbench.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/src/hackbench/hackbench.c b/src/hackbench/hackbench.c
index dda7690b79a0..69dd5f087fb6 100644
--- a/src/hackbench/hackbench.c
+++ b/src/hackbench/hackbench.c
@@ -444,6 +444,7 @@ static void process_options(int argc, char *argv[])
break;
case 'h':
print_usage_exit(0);
+ break;
case 'l':
if (!(argv[optind] && (loops = atoi(optarg)) > 0)) {
fprintf(stderr, "%s: --loops|-l requires an integer > 0\n", argv[0]);
--
2.38.1
