Smack: Mark expected switch fall-through
Subsystems (2)
PATCH 1/1 Smack: Mark expected switch fall-through
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through.
Notice that in this particular case, I replaced "No break" with a proper "Fall through" annotation, which is what GCC is expecting to find.
Warning level 2 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=2
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115051 ("Missing break in switch")
--- security/smack/smack_lsm.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
security/smack/smack_lsm.c +1 -1
@@ -3739,7 +3739,7 @@ static void smack_d_instantiate(struct dentry *opt_dentry, struct inode *inode)*/ final = &smack_known_star;/* -* No break. +* Fall through. * * If a smack value has been set we want to use it, * but since tmpfs isn't giving us the opportunity
Signature · 6 lines
2.7.4 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Casey Schaufler
maintainerQuoted 6 lines · Gustavo A. R. Silva
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through.
Notice that in this particular case, I replaced "No break" with a proper "Fall through" annotation, which is what GCC is expecting to find.
Holy bikeshedding, Batman! For decades I've seen "no break" as the proper way to warn that the lack of a "break;" is intentional. I suppose that "Fall through" makes just as much sense. Grumble.
Quoted 4 lines
Warning level 2 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=2
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115051 ("Missing break in switch")
Signed-off-by Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
Sure, I'll take this for 4.20 as my 4.19 changes are complete and there doesn't seem to be special urgency.
Quoted 9 lines
--- security/smack/smack_lsm.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)security/smack/smack_lsm.c +0
-0
security/smack/smack_lsm.c static void smack_d_instantiate(struct dentry *opt_dentry, struct inode *inode) · line 3745
Quoted 8 lines
security/smack/smack_lsm.c +1
-1@@ -3739,7 +3739,7 @@ static void smack_d_instantiate(struct dentry *opt_dentry, struct inode *inode)*/ final = &smack_known_star;/* -* No break. +* Fall through. * * If a smack value has been set we want to use it, * but since tmpfs isn't giving us the opportunity
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html