From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kalle Valo Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtl8xxxu: mark expected switch fall-throughs Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 11:41:49 +0300 Message-ID: <87o9peqdo2.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> References: <20171010193027.GA23108@embeddedor.com> <5f5f0f54-d901-90be-9025-0a1c4b909368@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Jes Sorensen Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5f5f0f54-d901-90be-9025-0a1c4b909368@gmail.com> (Jes Sorensen's message of "Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:35:10 -0400") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Jes Sorensen writes: > On 10/10/2017 03:30 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases >> where we are expecting to fall through. > > While this isn't harmful, to me this looks like pointless patch churn > for zero gain and it's just ugly. In general I find it useful to mark fall through cases. And it's just a comment with two words, so they cannot hurt your eyes that much. -- Kalle Valo