From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Darren Hart Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: acer-wmi: Mark expected switch fall-throughs Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 16:06:46 -0700 Message-ID: <20190508230645.GB32286@wrath> References: <20190508164934.GA20064@embeddedor> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190508164934.GA20064@embeddedor> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Cc: "Lee, Chun-Yi" , Andy Shevchenko , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kees Cook List-Id: platform-driver-x86.vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 11:49:34AM -0500, 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/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c: In function ‘set_u32’: > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c:1378:33: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > if (cap == ACER_CAP_WIRELESS || > ^ > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c:1386:3: note: here > case ACER_WMID: > ^~~~ > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c:1393:12: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > else if (wmi_has_guid(WMID_GUID2)) > ^ > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c:1395:3: note: here > default: > ^~~~~~~ > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c: In function ‘get_u32’: > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c:1340:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > if (cap == ACER_CAP_MAILLED) { > ^ > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c:1344:2: note: here > case ACER_WMID: > ^~~~ > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c: In function ‘WMID_get_u32’: > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c:1013:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > if (quirks->mailled == 1) { > ^ > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c:1018:2: note: here > default: > ^~~~~~~ > > Warning level 3 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3 > > This patch is part of the ongoing efforts to enable > -Wimplicit-fallthrough. > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva > --- > drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c > index fcfeadd1301f..bd87f9037f95 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/acer-wmi.c > @@ -1015,6 +1015,7 @@ static acpi_status WMID_get_u32(u32 *value, u32 cap) > *value = tmp & 0x1; > return 0; > } > + /* fall through */ > default: > return AE_ERROR; > } > @@ -1341,6 +1342,7 @@ static acpi_status get_u32(u32 *value, u32 cap) > status = AMW0_get_u32(value, cap); > break; > } > + /* fall through */ This doesn't strike me as obviously the right thing to do here. If the interface type is AMW0_V2, why is it the right thing to do to use WMID_get_u32 if the cap isn't ACER_CAP_MAILLED? > case ACER_WMID: > status = WMID_get_u32(value, cap); > break; > @@ -1383,6 +1385,7 @@ static acpi_status set_u32(u32 value, u32 cap) > > return AMW0_set_u32(value, cap); > } > + /* fall through */ Similarly here. Are we documenting intended behavior, or covering up a bug. > case ACER_WMID: > return WMID_set_u32(value, cap); -- Darren Hart VMware Open Source Technology Center