Re: [PATCH RESEND][next] rtl8xxxu: Fix fall-through warnings for Clang

[Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@gmail.com>]

On 3/10/21 2:14 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 03:40:33PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org> writes:
>>
>>> In preparation to enable -Wimplicit-fallthrough for Clang, fix
>>> multiple warnings by replacing /* fall through */ comments with
>>> the new pseudo-keyword macro fallthrough; instead of letting the
>>> code fall through to the next case.
>>>
>>> Notice that Clang doesn't recognize /* fall through */ comments as
>>> implicit fall-through markings.
>>>
>>> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/115
>>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
>>
>> It's not cool that you ignore the comments you got in [1], then after a
>> while mark the patch as "RESEND" and not even include a changelog why it
>> was resent.
>>
>> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/d522f387b2d0dde774785c7169c1f25aa529989d.1605896060.git.gustavoars@kernel.org/
> 
> Hm, this conversation looks like a miscommunication, mainly? I see
> Gustavo, as requested by many others[1], replacing the fallthrough
> comments with the "fallthrough" statement. (This is more than just a
> "Clang doesn't parse comments" issue.)
> 
> This could be a tree-wide patch and not bother you, but Greg KH has
> generally advised us to send these changes broken out. Anyway, this
> change still needs to land, so what would be the preferred path? I think
> Gustavo could just carry it for Linus to merge without bothering you if
> that'd be preferred?

I'll respond with the same I did last time, fallthrough is not C and
it's ugly.

Instead of mutilating the kernel, Gustavo should invest in fixing the
broken clang compiler.

Thanks,
Jes