From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935684AbeEYNav (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 May 2018 09:30:51 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:52526 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933214AbeEYNat (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 May 2018 09:30:49 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 533C560290 Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org From: Kalle Valo To: Sergei Shtylyov Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" , "David S. Miller" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath6kl: mark expected switch fall-throughs References: <20180524231322.GA22704@embeddedor.com> <060f93a0-7210-79b6-37a7-cd8900719d40@cogentembedded.com> Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:30:42 +0300 In-Reply-To: <060f93a0-7210-79b6-37a7-cd8900719d40@cogentembedded.com> (Sergei Shtylyov's message of "Fri, 25 May 2018 14:27:40 +0300") Message-ID: <871sdzc16l.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sergei Shtylyov writes: > On 5/25/2018 2:13 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > >> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases >> where we are expecting to fall through. >> >> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva >> --- >> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c | 6 +++--- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >> index 2ba8cf3..29e32cd 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >> @@ -3898,17 +3898,17 @@ int ath6kl_cfg80211_init(struct ath6kl *ar) >> wiphy->max_scan_ie_len = 1000; /* FIX: what is correct limit? */ >> switch (ar->hw.cap) { >> case WMI_11AN_CAP: >> - ht = true; >> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >> case WMI_11A_CAP: >> band_5gig = true; >> break; >> case WMI_11GN_CAP: >> - ht = true; >> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >> case WMI_11G_CAP: >> band_2gig = true; >> break; >> case WMI_11AGN_CAP: >> - ht = true; >> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >> case WMI_11AG_CAP: >> band_2gig = true; >> band_5gig = true; > > Hm, typically such comments are done on a line of their own, have > never seen this style... Yeah, I was wondering the same. Was there a particular reason for this? -- Kalle Valo