From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Subject: [PATCH] mmc: tifm_sd: Mark expected switch fall-through Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 11:54:57 +0200 Message-ID: <20181005095457.GA21116@embeddedor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alex Dubov , Ulf Hansson Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org 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 "deliberate fall-through" comment with a proper "fall through" at the bottom of the case, which is what GCC is expecting to find. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373887 ("Missing break in switch") Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva --- drivers/mmc/host/tifm_sd.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/tifm_sd.c b/drivers/mmc/host/tifm_sd.c index a3d8380..b6644ce 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/host/tifm_sd.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/tifm_sd.c @@ -336,7 +336,8 @@ static unsigned int tifm_sd_op_flags(struct mmc_command *cmd) rc |= TIFM_MMCSD_RSP_R0; break; case MMC_RSP_R1B: - rc |= TIFM_MMCSD_RSP_BUSY; // deliberate fall-through + rc |= TIFM_MMCSD_RSP_BUSY; + /* fall-through */ case MMC_RSP_R1: rc |= TIFM_MMCSD_RSP_R1; break; -- 2.7.4