Hi Gustavo, On 19. 2. 12. 오전 3:15, 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/clk/samsung/clk-s3c2443.c: In function ‘s3c2443_common_clk_init’: > drivers/clk/samsung/clk-s3c2443.c:390:3: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > samsung_clk_register_alias(ctx, s3c2450_aliases, > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ARRAY_SIZE(s3c2450_aliases)); > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > drivers/clk/samsung/clk-s3c2443.c:393:2: note: here > case S3C2416: > ^~~~ > > Warning level 3 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3 > > Notice that, in this particular case, the code comment is modified > in accordance with what GCC is expecting to find. > > This patch is part of the ongoing efforts to enable > -Wimplicit-fallthrough. Except for level 5 of -Wimplicit-fallthrough, level 4 is more strict to show the warnings. Why don't you support level 4 for -Wimplicit-fallthrough? I think that you want to fix for -Wimplicit-fallthrough warning, you better to support level 4. What do you think? > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/clk/samsung/clk-s3c2443.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-s3c2443.c b/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-s3c2443.c > index 884067e4f1a1..f38f0e24e3b6 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-s3c2443.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-s3c2443.c > @@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ void __init s3c2443_common_clk_init(struct device_node *np, unsigned long xti_f, > ARRAY_SIZE(s3c2450_gates)); > samsung_clk_register_alias(ctx, s3c2450_aliases, > ARRAY_SIZE(s3c2450_aliases)); > - /* fall through, as s3c2450 extends the s3c2416 clocks */ > + /* fall through - as s3c2450 extends the s3c2416 clocks */ > case S3C2416: > samsung_clk_register_div(ctx, s3c2416_dividers, > ARRAY_SIZE(s3c2416_dividers)); > -- Best Regards, Chanwoo Choi Samsung Electronics
