On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Joonas Lahtinen <
joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On ti, 2016-10-11 at 12:03 -0700, Robert Bragg wrote:
> > > > +               case DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_MAX:
> > > > +                       BUG();
> > >
> > > We already handle this case above, but I guess we still need this in
> > > order to silence gcc...
> >
> > right, and preferable to having a default: case, for the future compiler
> warning to handle any new properties here.
>
> Please, do use MISSING_CASE instead. Daniel is known to get upset for
> far less ;)
>
> Generally consensus is that BUG() is used only when there're no other
> options to back out.
>

thanks for this pointer.

I'll add a default: with MISSING_CASE as that looks like an i915-specific
convention; though it seems like a real shame to defer missing case issues
to runtime errors instead of taking advantage of the compiler complaining
at build time that a case has been forgotten.

Thanks,
- Robert



>
> Regards, Joonas
> --
> Joonas Lahtinen
> Open Source Technology Center
> Intel Corporation
>