rtc: m41t80: fix fall-through annotation
PATCH 1/1 rtc: m41t80: fix fall-through annotation
Replace "Fall" with a proper "Fall through" annotation.
This fix is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373875 ("Missing break in switch")
--- drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c +1 -1
@@ -745,7 +745,7 @@ static int wdt_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,return -EINVAL ; wdt_margin = new_margin;wdt_ping (); -/* Fall */ +/* Fall through */ case WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT :return put_user (wdt_margin, (int __user *)arg);
Signature · 1 line
2.7.4
Alexandre Belloni
maintainerHi,
Quoted 5 lines · Gustavo A. R. Silva
Replace "Fall" with a proper "Fall through" annotation.
This fix is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough
Can we agree that this is absolutely not a fix? I don't wan't to have that needlessly backport on gazillion stable kernel.
Quoted 22 lines
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1373875 ("Missing break in switch")
Signed-off-by Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>--- drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c +1
-1@@ -745,7 +745,7 @@ static int wdt_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,return -EINVAL ; wdt_margin = new_margin;wdt_ping (); -/* Fall */ +/* Fall through */ case WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT :return put_user (wdt_margin, (int __user *)arg);Signature · 1 line
2.7.4
Signature · 3 lines
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
Quoted 12 lines · Alexandre Belloni
Hi,
Quoted 5 lines · Gustavo A. R. Silva
Replace "Fall" with a proper "Fall through" annotation.
This fix is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough
Can we agree that this is absolutely not a fix? I don't wan't to have that needlessly backport on gazillion stable kernel.
Well, as clearly the intention of the developer was to add a fall-through comment, but it was incomplete, I considered this a fix. But, I see your point and I agree. There is not need for this to be applied to stable trees.
I will change the subject.
Thanks
--
Gustavo