From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from gateway21.websitewelcome.com ([192.185.45.140]:34901 "EHLO gateway21.websitewelcome.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S967385AbeEYSPp (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 May 2018 14:15:45 -0400 Received: from cm16.websitewelcome.com (cm16.websitewelcome.com [100.42.49.19]) by gateway21.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E7E4401220C0 for ; Fri, 25 May 2018 12:50:20 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath6kl: mark expected switch fall-throughs To: Kalle Valo , Sergei Shtylyov Cc: "David S. Miller" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20180524231322.GA22704@embeddedor.com> <060f93a0-7210-79b6-37a7-cd8900719d40@cogentembedded.com> <871sdzc16l.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Message-ID: (sfid-20180525_201808_115411_C70B4ABA) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:50:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <871sdzc16l.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/25/2018 08:30 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Sergei Shtylyov 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 >>> --- >>> 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