| Message ID | 20180524231322.GA22704@embeddedor.com |
|---|---|
| State | Awaiting Upstream, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
| Series | ath6kl: mark expected switch fall-throughs | expand |
Hello! On 5/25/2018 2:13 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases > where we are expecting to fall through. > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> > --- > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c > index 2ba8cf3..29e32cd 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c > @@ -3898,17 +3898,17 @@ int ath6kl_cfg80211_init(struct ath6kl *ar) > wiphy->max_scan_ie_len = 1000; /* FIX: what is correct limit? */ > switch (ar->hw.cap) { > case WMI_11AN_CAP: > - ht = true; > + ht = true; /* fall through */ > case WMI_11A_CAP: > band_5gig = true; > break; > case WMI_11GN_CAP: > - ht = true; > + ht = true; /* fall through */ > case WMI_11G_CAP: > band_2gig = true; > break; > case WMI_11AGN_CAP: > - ht = true; > + ht = true; /* fall through */ > case WMI_11AG_CAP: > band_2gig = true; > band_5gig = true; Hm, typically such comments are done on a line of their own, have never seen this style... MBR, Sergei
Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com> writes: > On 5/25/2018 2:13 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > >> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases >> where we are expecting to fall through. >> >> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> >> --- >> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c | 6 +++--- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >> index 2ba8cf3..29e32cd 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >> @@ -3898,17 +3898,17 @@ int ath6kl_cfg80211_init(struct ath6kl *ar) >> wiphy->max_scan_ie_len = 1000; /* FIX: what is correct limit? */ >> switch (ar->hw.cap) { >> case WMI_11AN_CAP: >> - ht = true; >> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >> case WMI_11A_CAP: >> band_5gig = true; >> break; >> case WMI_11GN_CAP: >> - ht = true; >> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >> case WMI_11G_CAP: >> band_2gig = true; >> break; >> case WMI_11AGN_CAP: >> - ht = true; >> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >> case WMI_11AG_CAP: >> band_2gig = true; >> band_5gig = true; > > Hm, typically such comments are done on a line of their own, have > never seen this style... Yeah, I was wondering the same. Was there a particular reason for this?
On 05/25/2018 08:30 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com> writes: > >> On 5/25/2018 2:13 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >> >>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases >>> where we are expecting to fall through. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c | 6 +++--- >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >>> index 2ba8cf3..29e32cd 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >>> @@ -3898,17 +3898,17 @@ int ath6kl_cfg80211_init(struct ath6kl *ar) >>> wiphy->max_scan_ie_len = 1000; /* FIX: what is correct limit? */ >>> switch (ar->hw.cap) { >>> case WMI_11AN_CAP: >>> - ht = true; >>> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >>> case WMI_11A_CAP: >>> band_5gig = true; >>> break; >>> case WMI_11GN_CAP: >>> - ht = true; >>> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >>> case WMI_11G_CAP: >>> band_2gig = true; >>> break; >>> case WMI_11AGN_CAP: >>> - ht = true; >>> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >>> case WMI_11AG_CAP: >>> band_2gig = true; >>> band_5gig = true; >> >> Hm, typically such comments are done on a line of their own, have >> never seen this style... > > Yeah, I was wondering the same. Was there a particular reason for this? > Sometimes people use this style for a one-line code block. I can change it to the traditional style. No problem. Thanks -- Gustavo
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com> writes: > On 05/25/2018 08:30 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com> writes: >> >>> On 5/25/2018 2:13 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >>> >>>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases >>>> where we are expecting to fall through. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c | 6 +++--- >>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >>>> index 2ba8cf3..29e32cd 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c >>>> @@ -3898,17 +3898,17 @@ int ath6kl_cfg80211_init(struct ath6kl *ar) >>>> wiphy->max_scan_ie_len = 1000; /* FIX: what is correct limit? */ >>>> switch (ar->hw.cap) { >>>> case WMI_11AN_CAP: >>>> - ht = true; >>>> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >>>> case WMI_11A_CAP: >>>> band_5gig = true; >>>> break; >>>> case WMI_11GN_CAP: >>>> - ht = true; >>>> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >>>> case WMI_11G_CAP: >>>> band_2gig = true; >>>> break; >>>> case WMI_11AGN_CAP: >>>> - ht = true; >>>> + ht = true; /* fall through */ >>>> case WMI_11AG_CAP: >>>> band_2gig = true; >>>> band_5gig = true; >>> >>> Hm, typically such comments are done on a line of their own, have >>> never seen this style... >> >> Yeah, I was wondering the same. Was there a particular reason for this? >> > > Sometimes people use this style for a one-line code block. > > I can change it to the traditional style. No problem. I would prefer that. So if you can send v2 that would be great.
On 05/25/2018 01:10 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>> Yeah, I was wondering the same. Was there a particular reason for this? >>> >> >> Sometimes people use this style for a one-line code block. >> >> I can change it to the traditional style. No problem. > > I would prefer that. So if you can send v2 that would be great. > Yep. No problem. I'll send it shortly. Thanks -- Gustavo
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c index 2ba8cf3..29e32cd 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c @@ -3898,17 +3898,17 @@ int ath6kl_cfg80211_init(struct ath6kl *ar) wiphy->max_scan_ie_len = 1000; /* FIX: what is correct limit? */ switch (ar->hw.cap) { case WMI_11AN_CAP: - ht = true; + ht = true; /* fall through */ case WMI_11A_CAP: band_5gig = true; break; case WMI_11GN_CAP: - ht = true; + ht = true; /* fall through */ case WMI_11G_CAP: band_2gig = true; break; case WMI_11AGN_CAP: - ht = true; + ht = true; /* fall through */ case WMI_11AG_CAP: band_2gig = true; band_5gig = true;
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> --- drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/cfg80211.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)