From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Subject: [PATCH net-next] wimax: usb-tx: mark expected switch fall-through Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2018 10:47:20 -0500 Message-ID: <20180809154720.GA17920@embeddedor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" To: Inaky Perez-Gonzalez , linux-wimax@intel.com, "David S. Miller" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.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 placed the "fall through" annotation at the bottom of the case, which is what GCC is expecting to find. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115075 ("Missing break in switch") Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva --- drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c b/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c index 99ef81b..3a0e722 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c +++ b/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c @@ -131,12 +131,12 @@ int i2400mu_tx(struct i2400mu *i2400mu, struct i2400m_msg_hdr *tx_msg, dev_err(dev, "BM-CMD: too many stalls in " "URB; resetting device\n"); usb_queue_reset_device(i2400mu->usb_iface); - /* fallthrough */ } else { usb_clear_halt(i2400mu->usb_dev, usb_pipe); msleep(10); /* give the device some time */ goto retry; } + /* fall through */ case -EINVAL: /* while removing driver */ case -ENODEV: /* dev disconnect ... */ case -ENOENT: /* just ignore it */ -- 2.7.4