On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 11:41:39AM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> On 08/03/2018 11:26 AM, valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 14:56:16 -0500, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" said:

> > Wait, what? This looks like the sort of bug -Wimplicit-fallthrough is supposed
> > to catch.  Unless for 'case WM8994_SYSCLK_OPCLK:' we actually do want to do a
> > whole bunch of snd_soc_component_update_bits() calls and then return -EINVAL
> > whether or not that case succeeded?

> Yeah, it seems like a bug. Can someone confirm this?

> Notice that this code has been there since 2010.

Basically nobody ever uses OPCLK so I'd be susprised if anyone ever
noticed.