From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-path: <ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wireless: remove unneeded break
References: <20201019150507.20574-1-trix@redhat.com>
From: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b31478ea-979a-1c9c-65db-32325233a715@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 17:14:31 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20201019150507.20574-1-trix@redhat.com>
Content-Language: de-DE
List-Id: <ath10k.lists.infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/ath10k>,
 <mailto:ath10k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/ath10k/>
List-Post: <mailto:ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ath10k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k>,
 <mailto:ath10k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: "ath10k" <ath10k-bounces@lists.infradead.org>
Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org
To: trix@redhat.com, kvalo@codeaurora.org, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com, alexandre.torgue@st.com, ath9k-devel@qca.qualcomm.com, johannes.berg@intel.com, emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com, luciano.coelho@intel.com, linuxwifi@intel.com, chunkeey@googlemail.com, pkshih@realtek.com, sara.sharon@intel.com, tova.mussai@intel.com, nathan.errera@intel.com, lior2.cohen@intel.com, john@phrozen.org, shaul.triebitz@intel.com, shahar.s.matityahu@intel.com, Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net, zhengbin13@huawei.com, christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr, yanaijie@huawei.com, joe@perches.com, saurav.girepunje@gmail.com
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org

On 19/10/2020 17:05, trix@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> 
> A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return or goto
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>

> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> index 5bd35c147e19..3ca9d26df174 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> @@ -870,7 +870,6 @@ int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int len)
>   			} else {
>   				goto good_eeprom;
>   			}
> -			break;
Won't the compiler (gcc) now complain about a missing fallthrough annotation?
>   		default:
>   			break;
>   		}

Cheers,
Christian

_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k