Quentin Monnet <quentin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf_dumper.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf_dumper.c
> index e7f6ec3a8f35..583aa843df92 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf_dumper.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf_dumper.c
> @@ -821,3 +821,37 @@ void btf_dump_linfo_json(const struct btf *btf,
> BPF_LINE_INFO_LINE_COL(linfo->line_col));
> }
> }
> +
> +static void dotlabel_puts(const char *s)
> +{
> + for (; *s; ++s) {
> + switch (*s) {
> + case '\\':
> + case '"':
> + case '{':
> + case '}':
> + case '<':
> + case '>':
> + case '|':
> + case ' ':
> + putchar('\\');
> + __fallthrough;
Is __fallthrough correct? I see the following compile error on s390 in
linux-next (20230412):
CC btf_dumper.o
btf_dumper.c: In function ‘dotlabel_puts’:
btf_dumper.c:838:25: error: ‘__fallthrough’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘fallthrough’?
838 | __fallthrough;
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
removing the two underscores fixes this.
> + default:
> + putchar(*s);
> + }
> + }
> +}
Thanks,
Sven
