From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin K. Petersen" Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: mark expected switch fall-throughs Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 22:47:40 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20181003145535.GA24941@embeddedor.com> <84512689-d898-e670-075d-509bbff20423@embeddedor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: <84512689-d898-e670-075d-509bbff20423@embeddedor.com> (Gustavo A. R. Silva's message of "Fri, 12 Oct 2018 14:26:58 +0200") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" , Don Brace , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Adaptec OEM Raid Solutions , Willem Riede , Kai =?utf-8?Q?M?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A4kisara?= , esc.storagedev@microsemi.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, osst-users@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Gustavo, >> I'm not entirely convinced that all these identified fall through cases >> are intentional. From a quick glance, some of them look like bugs... > > I took a second look at this and, certainly, the one below looks more like a > bug. The rest seem to be false positives. Yep. >>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ips.c b/drivers/scsi/ips.c >>> index bd6ac6b..8e1c45d 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ips.c >>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ips.c >>> @@ -3485,6 +3485,7 @@ ips_send_cmd(ips_ha_t * ha, ips_scb_t * scb) >>> >>> case START_STOP: >>> scb->scsi_cmd->result = DID_OK << 16; >>> + /* fall through */ > > If you confirm this is an actual bug, I can send a separate fix. I believe it is. So please do. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering