On 10/10/2017 03:30 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
where we are expecting to fall through.
While this isn't harmful, to me this looks like pointless patch churn
for zero gain and it's just ugly.
Jes
Cc: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu_core.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu_core.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu_core.c
index 7806a4d..e66be05 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu_core.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu_core.c
@@ -1153,6 +1153,7 @@ void rtl8xxxu_gen1_config_channel(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
switch (hw->conf.chandef.width) {
case NL80211_CHAN_WIDTH_20_NOHT:
ht = false;
+ /* fall through */
case NL80211_CHAN_WIDTH_20:
opmode |= BW_OPMODE_20MHZ;
rtl8xxxu_write8(priv, REG_BW_OPMODE, opmode);
@@ -1280,6 +1281,7 @@ void rtl8xxxu_gen2_config_channel(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
switch (hw->conf.chandef.width) {
case NL80211_CHAN_WIDTH_20_NOHT:
ht = false;
+ /* fall through */
case NL80211_CHAN_WIDTH_20:
rf_mode_bw |= WMAC_TRXPTCL_CTL_BW_20;
subchannel = 0;
@@ -1748,9 +1750,11 @@ static int rtl8xxxu_identify_chip(struct rtl8xxxu_priv *priv)
case 3:
priv->ep_tx_low_queue = 1;
priv->ep_tx_count++;
+ /* fall through */
case 2:
priv->ep_tx_normal_queue = 1;
priv->ep_tx_count++;
+ /* fall through */
case 1:
priv->ep_tx_high_queue = 1;
priv->ep_tx_count++;
@@ -5691,6 +5695,7 @@ static int rtl8xxxu_set_key(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, enum set_key_cmd cmd,
break;
case WLAN_CIPHER_SUITE_TKIP:
key->flags |= IEEE80211_KEY_FLAG_GENERATE_MMIC;
+ /* fall through */
default:
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
}
