Re: [PATCH] ipmi: kcs_bmc: mark expected switch fall-through in kcs_bmc_handle_data

["Wang, Haiyue" <haiyue.wang@linux.intel.com>]

On 2018-02-15 05:46, Corey Minyard wrote:
> On 02/14/2018 11:30 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
>> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> Thanks, queued for next release.
>
> -corey
>
>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1465255 ("Missing break in switch")
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@embeddedor.com>
>> ---
>> This code was compiled with GCC 7.3.0
>>
>>   drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc.c | 1 +
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc.c
>> index 3a3498a..6476bfb 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc.c
>> @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ static void kcs_bmc_handle_data(struct kcs_bmc 
>> *kcs_bmc)
>>       switch (kcs_bmc->phase) {
>>       case KCS_PHASE_WRITE_START:
>>           kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_WRITE_DATA;
>> +        /* fall through */
Thanks, Gustavo. I see many modules have '/* fall through */', but I 
thought it was a just C comment, I didn't
add it for making code clean. Learned it, thank you! :-)
>>         case KCS_PHASE_WRITE_DATA:
>>           if (kcs_bmc->data_in_idx < KCS_MSG_BUFSIZ) {
>
>