* [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
@ 2018-10-05 10:09 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Gustavo A. R. Silva @ 2018-10-05 10:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
where we are expecting to fall through.
Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
expecting to find.
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
---
drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c b/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
index 2cfec33..abe253c 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
@@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ static void meson_mx_mmc_set_ios(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_ios *ios)
switch (ios->power_mode) {
case MMC_POWER_OFF:
vdd = 0;
- /* fall-through: */
+ /* fall through */
case MMC_POWER_UP:
if (!IS_ERR(mmc->supply.vmmc)) {
host->error = mmc_regulator_set_ocr(mmc,
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
@ 2018-10-05 10:09 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Gustavo A. R. Silva @ 2018-10-05 10:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ulf Hansson, Carlo Caione, Kevin Hilman
Cc: linux-mmc, linux-arm-kernel, linux-amlogic, linux-kernel,
Gustavo A. R. Silva
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
where we are expecting to fall through.
Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
expecting to find.
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
---
drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c b/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
index 2cfec33..abe253c 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
@@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ static void meson_mx_mmc_set_ios(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_ios *ios)
switch (ios->power_mode) {
case MMC_POWER_OFF:
vdd = 0;
- /* fall-through: */
+ /* fall through */
case MMC_POWER_UP:
if (!IS_ERR(mmc->supply.vmmc)) {
host->error = mmc_regulator_set_ocr(mmc,
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
2018-10-05 10:09 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
(?)
@ 2018-10-05 13:54 ` Ulf Hansson
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Ulf Hansson @ 2018-10-05 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linus-amlogic
On 5 October 2018 at 12:09, Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote:
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
> comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
> expecting to find.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Applied for next, thanks!
Kind regards
Uffe
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c b/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
> index 2cfec33..abe253c 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
> @@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ static void meson_mx_mmc_set_ios(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_ios *ios)
> switch (ios->power_mode) {
> case MMC_POWER_OFF:
> vdd = 0;
> - /* fall-through: */
> + /* fall through */
> case MMC_POWER_UP:
> if (!IS_ERR(mmc->supply.vmmc)) {
> host->error = mmc_regulator_set_ocr(mmc,
> --
> 2.7.4
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
@ 2018-10-05 13:54 ` Ulf Hansson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Ulf Hansson @ 2018-10-05 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 5 October 2018 at 12:09, Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote:
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
> comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
> expecting to find.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Applied for next, thanks!
Kind regards
Uffe
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c b/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
> index 2cfec33..abe253c 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
> @@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ static void meson_mx_mmc_set_ios(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_ios *ios)
> switch (ios->power_mode) {
> case MMC_POWER_OFF:
> vdd = 0;
> - /* fall-through: */
> + /* fall through */
> case MMC_POWER_UP:
> if (!IS_ERR(mmc->supply.vmmc)) {
> host->error = mmc_regulator_set_ocr(mmc,
> --
> 2.7.4
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
@ 2018-10-05 13:54 ` Ulf Hansson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Ulf Hansson @ 2018-10-05 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gustavo A. R. Silva
Cc: Carlo Caione, Kevin Hilman, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, Linux ARM,
open list:ARM/Amlogic Meson..., Linux Kernel Mailing List
On 5 October 2018 at 12:09, Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote:
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
> comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
> expecting to find.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Applied for next, thanks!
Kind regards
Uffe
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c b/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
> index 2cfec33..abe253c 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c
> @@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ static void meson_mx_mmc_set_ios(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_ios *ios)
> switch (ios->power_mode) {
> case MMC_POWER_OFF:
> vdd = 0;
> - /* fall-through: */
> + /* fall through */
> case MMC_POWER_UP:
> if (!IS_ERR(mmc->supply.vmmc)) {
> host->error = mmc_regulator_set_ocr(mmc,
> --
> 2.7.4
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
2018-10-05 10:09 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
(?)
@ 2018-10-05 21:10 ` Martin Blumenstingl
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Martin Blumenstingl @ 2018-10-05 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linus-amlogic
On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 12:15 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva
<gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote:
>
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
> comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
> expecting to find.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Acked-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
thank you for taking care of this!
Regards
Martin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
@ 2018-10-05 21:10 ` Martin Blumenstingl
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Martin Blumenstingl @ 2018-10-05 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 12:15 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva
<gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote:
>
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
> comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
> expecting to find.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Acked-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
thank you for taking care of this!
Regards
Martin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
@ 2018-10-05 21:10 ` Martin Blumenstingl
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Martin Blumenstingl @ 2018-10-05 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gustavo
Cc: ulf.hansson, carlo, khilman, linux-amlogic, linux-mmc,
linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel
On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 12:15 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva
<gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote:
>
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
> comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
> expecting to find.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Acked-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
thank you for taking care of this!
Regards
Martin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
2018-10-05 21:10 ` Martin Blumenstingl
(?)
@ 2018-10-05 21:20 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Gustavo A. R. Silva @ 2018-10-05 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linus-amlogic
Hi Martin,
On 10/5/18 11:10 PM, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 12:15 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva
> <gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote:
>>
>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
>> where we are expecting to fall through.
>>
>> Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
>> comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
>> expecting to find.
>>
>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
> Acked-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
>
> thank you for taking care of this!
>
Glad to help. :)
Thanks
--
Gustavo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
@ 2018-10-05 21:20 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Gustavo A. R. Silva @ 2018-10-05 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi Martin,
On 10/5/18 11:10 PM, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 12:15 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva
> <gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote:
>>
>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
>> where we are expecting to fall through.
>>
>> Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
>> comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
>> expecting to find.
>>
>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
> Acked-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
>
> thank you for taking care of this!
>
Glad to help. :)
Thanks
--
Gustavo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] mmc: meson-mx-sdio: mark expected switch fall-through
@ 2018-10-05 21:20 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Gustavo A. R. Silva @ 2018-10-05 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Blumenstingl
Cc: ulf.hansson, carlo, khilman, linux-amlogic, linux-mmc,
linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel
Hi Martin,
On 10/5/18 11:10 PM, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 12:15 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva
> <gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote:
>>
>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
>> where we are expecting to fall through.
>>
>> Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the "fall-through:"
>> comment with a proper "fall through", which is what GCC is
>> expecting to find.
>>
>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373880 ("Missing break in switch")
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
> Acked-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
>
> thank you for taking care of this!
>
Glad to help. :)
Thanks
--
Gustavo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread