[PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_esai: replace fall-through with break

[PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_esai: replace fall-through with break

[S.j. Wang]

case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL and case ESAI_HCKR_EXTAL should be independent of
each other, so replace fall-through with break.

Fixes: 16bbeb2b43c3 ("ASoC: fsl_esai: Mark expected switch fall-through")

Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>
---
 sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
index c7410bbfd2af..bad0dfed6b68 100644
--- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
+++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
@@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ static int fsl_esai_set_dai_sysclk(struct snd_soc_dai *dai, int clk_id,
 		break;
 	case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL:
 		ecr |= ESAI_ECR_ETI;
-		/* fall through */
+		break;
 	case ESAI_HCKR_EXTAL:
 		ecr |= esai_priv->synchronous ? ESAI_ECR_ETI : ESAI_ECR_ERI;
 		break;
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_esai: replace fall-through with break

[Gustavo A. R. Silva]

On 4/8/19 4:28 AM, S.j. Wang wrote:
> case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL and case ESAI_HCKR_EXTAL should be independent of
> each other, so replace fall-through with break.
> 
If this is correct, then you should use the following "Fixes" tag instead,
which is the one that introduced the bug:

Fixes: 43d24e76b698 ("ASoC: fsl_esai: Add ESAI CPU DAI driver")

> Fixes: 16bbeb2b43c3 ("ASoC: fsl_esai: Mark expected switch fall-through")
> 
        ^^^^
because this didn't change any functionality.

> Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>
> ---
>  sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
> index c7410bbfd2af..bad0dfed6b68 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
> @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ static int fsl_esai_set_dai_sysclk(struct snd_soc_dai *dai, int clk_id,
>  		break;
>  	case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL:
>  		ecr |= ESAI_ECR_ETI;

Also, you should use a simple assignment operator "=" instead of "|=" in both cases.

> -		/* fall through */
> +		break;
>  	case ESAI_HCKR_EXTAL:
>  		ecr |= esai_priv->synchronous ? ESAI_ECR_ETI : ESAI_ECR_ERI;
>  		break;
> 

Thanks
--
Gustavo

RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_esai: replace fall-through with break

[S.j. Wang]

Hi Gustavo

> 
> 
> On 4/8/19 4:28 AM, S.j. Wang wrote:
> > case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL and case ESAI_HCKR_EXTAL should be
> independent of
> > each other, so replace fall-through with break.
> >
> If this is correct, then you should use the following "Fixes" tag instead,
> which is the one that introduced the bug:
> 
> Fixes: 43d24e76b698 ("ASoC: fsl_esai: Add ESAI CPU DAI driver")
> 
> > Fixes: 16bbeb2b43c3 ("ASoC: fsl_esai: Mark expected switch
> > fall-through")
> >
>         ^^^^
> because this didn't change any functionality.

Ok, this will be updated.

> 
> > Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>
> > ---
> >  sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c index
> > c7410bbfd2af..bad0dfed6b68 100644
> > --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
> > +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
> > @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ static int fsl_esai_set_dai_sysclk(struct
> snd_soc_dai *dai, int clk_id,
> >               break;
> >       case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL:
> >               ecr |= ESAI_ECR_ETI;
> 
> Also, you should use a simple assignment operator "=" instead of "|=" in
> both cases.

The result is same for "=" and "|=", because there is "ecr = 0" in beginning of
This function. 

> 
> > -             /* fall through */
> > +             break;
> >       case ESAI_HCKR_EXTAL:
> >               ecr |= esai_priv->synchronous ? ESAI_ECR_ETI : ESAI_ECR_ERI;
> >               break;
> >
> 
> Thanks
> --
> Gustavo

Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_esai: replace fall-through with break

[Gustavo A. R. Silva]

Hi Shengjiu,

On 4/8/19 9:54 PM, S.j. Wang wrote:
> Hi Gustavo
> 
>>
>>
>> On 4/8/19 4:28 AM, S.j. Wang wrote:
>>> case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL and case ESAI_HCKR_EXTAL should be
>> independent of
>>> each other, so replace fall-through with break.
>>>
>> If this is correct, then you should use the following "Fixes" tag instead,
>> which is the one that introduced the bug:
>>
>> Fixes: 43d24e76b698 ("ASoC: fsl_esai: Add ESAI CPU DAI driver")
>>
>>> Fixes: 16bbeb2b43c3 ("ASoC: fsl_esai: Mark expected switch
>>> fall-through")
>>>
>>         ^^^^
>> because this didn't change any functionality.
> 
> Ok, this will be updated.
> 
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>
>>> ---
>>>  sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c index
>>> c7410bbfd2af..bad0dfed6b68 100644
>>> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
>>> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
>>> @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ static int fsl_esai_set_dai_sysclk(struct
>> snd_soc_dai *dai, int clk_id,
>>>               break;
>>>       case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL:
>>>               ecr |= ESAI_ECR_ETI;
>>
>> Also, you should use a simple assignment operator "=" instead of "|=" in
>> both cases.
> 
> The result is same for "=" and "|=", because there is "ecr = 0" in beginning of
> This function. 
> 

Following that same logic, then why not use "+=" instead?

The point is: is "|=" or any other assignment operator other than "=" necessary?
The answer in this case is: no, it is not.  So, go for the simple one and avoid
any unnecessary confusion.

Also, there is no need for versioning a patch for it's first revision.  If you
receive feedback on a patch and are asked to update it, then you do need to
version the patches that you re-send.

Thanks
--
Gustavo

>>
>>> -             /* fall through */
>>> +             break;
>>>       case ESAI_HCKR_EXTAL:
>>>               ecr |= esai_priv->synchronous ? ESAI_ECR_ETI : ESAI_ECR_ERI;
>>>               break;
>>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> --
>> Gustavo

Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_esai: replace fall-through with break

[Nicolin Chen]

Hi Gustavo,

On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 10:20:25PM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> >>> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c index
> >>> c7410bbfd2af..bad0dfed6b68 100644
> >>> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
> >>> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
> >>> @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ static int fsl_esai_set_dai_sysclk(struct
> >> snd_soc_dai *dai, int clk_id,
> >>>               break;
> >>>       case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL:
> >>>               ecr |= ESAI_ECR_ETI;
> >>
> >> Also, you should use a simple assignment operator "=" instead of "|=" in
> >> both cases.
> > 
> > The result is same for "=" and "|=", because there is "ecr = 0" in beginning of
> > This function. 
> > 
> 
> Following that same logic, then why not use "+=" instead?
> 
> The point is: is "|=" or any other assignment operator other than "=" necessary?
> The answer in this case is: no, it is not.  So, go for the simple one and avoid
> any unnecessary confusion.

I would like to keep "|=" here, just in case that someday it'd be easier
to insert something to ecr before this chunk. So please get easy on this
one.

Thanks
Nicolin

RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_esai: replace fall-through with break

[S.j. Wang]

Hi

> 
> Hi Gustavo,
> 
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 10:20:25PM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > >>> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
> > >>> index
> > >>> c7410bbfd2af..bad0dfed6b68 100644
> > >>> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
> > >>> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
> > >>> @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ static int fsl_esai_set_dai_sysclk(struct
> > >> snd_soc_dai *dai, int clk_id,
> > >>>               break;
> > >>>       case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL:
> > >>>               ecr |= ESAI_ECR_ETI;
> > >>
> > >> Also, you should use a simple assignment operator "=" instead of
> > >> "|=" in both cases.
> > >
> > > The result is same for "=" and "|=", because there is "ecr = 0" in
> > > beginning of This function.
> > >
> >
> > Following that same logic, then why not use "+=" instead?
> >
> > The point is: is "|=" or any other assignment operator other than "="
> necessary?
> > The answer in this case is: no, it is not.  So, go for the simple one
> > and avoid any unnecessary confusion.
> 
> I would like to keep "|=" here, just in case that someday it'd be easier to
> insert something to ecr before this chunk. So please get easy on this one.
> 
> Thanks
> Nicolin

Thanks for reviewing,  I will send v2.

Best regards
Wang shengjiu

Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_esai: replace fall-through with break

[Nicolin Chen]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 09:28:06AM +0000, S.j. Wang wrote:
> case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL and case ESAI_HCKR_EXTAL should be independent of
> each other, so replace fall-through with break.
> 
> Fixes: 16bbeb2b43c3 ("ASoC: fsl_esai: Mark expected switch fall-through")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>

Acked-by: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>

Thanks

Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_esai: replace fall-through with break

[Nicolin Chen]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 08:50:59PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 09:28:06AM +0000, S.j. Wang wrote:
> > case ESAI_HCKT_EXTAL and case ESAI_HCKR_EXTAL should be independent of
> > each other, so replace fall-through with break.
> > 
> > Fixes: 16bbeb2b43c3 ("ASoC: fsl_esai: Mark expected switch fall-through")
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>
> 
> Thanks

Oops. Acked the older version...should have gong for v2.

Please ignore it.