* [PATCH] kdb: kdb_main: mark expected switch fall-throughs
@ 2018-08-05 4:14 Gustavo A. R. Silva
2018-08-15 14:34 ` Daniel Thompson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Gustavo A. R. Silva @ 2018-08-05 4:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Wessel, Daniel Thompson
Cc: kgdb-bugreport, linux-kernel, Gustavo A. R. Silva
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
where we are expecting to fall through.
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115090 ("Missing break in switch")
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115091 ("Missing break in switch")
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114700 ("Missing break in switch")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
---
kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
index 2ddfce8..2249645 100644
--- a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
+++ b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
@@ -1545,13 +1545,16 @@ static void kdb_md_line(const char *fmtstr, unsigned long addr,
*c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
*c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
addr += 4;
+ /* fall through */
case 4:
*c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
*c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
addr += 2;
+ /* fall through */
case 2:
*c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
addr++;
+ /* fall through */
case 1:
*c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
addr++;
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kdb: kdb_main: mark expected switch fall-throughs
2018-08-05 4:14 [PATCH] kdb: kdb_main: mark expected switch fall-throughs Gustavo A. R. Silva
@ 2018-08-15 14:34 ` Daniel Thompson
2018-08-15 14:43 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Thompson @ 2018-08-15 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gustavo A. R. Silva, Jason Wessel; +Cc: kgdb-bugreport, linux-kernel
On 05/08/18 05:14, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115090 ("Missing break in switch")
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115091 ("Missing break in switch")
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114700 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Adding fall through isn't wrong but its reasonable to ask why there is a
complex hand unrolled loop here in the first place (and doubly so
without a comment). The whole switch statement would be much clear
expressed as:
for (j=0; j<bytesperword; j++)
*c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
addr += bytesperword;
Daniel.
> ---
> kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
> index 2ddfce8..2249645 100644
> --- a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
> +++ b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
> @@ -1545,13 +1545,16 @@ static void kdb_md_line(const char *fmtstr, unsigned long addr,
> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
> addr += 4;
> + /* fall through */
> case 4:
> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
> addr += 2;
> + /* fall through */
> case 2:
> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
> addr++;
> + /* fall through */
> case 1:
> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
> addr++;
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kdb: kdb_main: mark expected switch fall-throughs
2018-08-15 14:34 ` Daniel Thompson
@ 2018-08-15 14:43 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Gustavo A. R. Silva @ 2018-08-15 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Thompson, Jason Wessel; +Cc: kgdb-bugreport, linux-kernel
Hi Daniel,
On 8/15/18 9:34 AM, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On 05/08/18 05:14, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
>> where we are expecting to fall through.
>>
>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115090 ("Missing break in switch")
>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115091 ("Missing break in switch")
>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114700 ("Missing break in switch")
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
>
> Adding fall through isn't wrong but its reasonable to ask why there is a complex hand unrolled loop here in the first place (and doubly so without a comment). The whole switch statement would be much clear expressed as:
>
> for (j=0; j<bytesperword; j++)
> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
> addr += bytesperword;
>
Yeah, I agree. I can send a patch for that.
Thanks for the feedback.
--
Gustavo
>
> Daniel.
>
>
>> ---
>> kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
>> index 2ddfce8..2249645 100644
>> --- a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
>> +++ b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
>> @@ -1545,13 +1545,16 @@ static void kdb_md_line(const char *fmtstr, unsigned long addr,
>> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
>> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
>> addr += 4;
>> + /* fall through */
>> case 4:
>> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
>> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
>> addr += 2;
>> + /* fall through */
>> case 2:
>> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
>> addr++;
>> + /* fall through */
>> case 1:
>> *c++ = printable_char(*cp++);
>> addr++;
>>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-08-15 15:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-08-05 4:14 [PATCH] kdb: kdb_main: mark expected switch fall-throughs Gustavo A. R. Silva
2018-08-15 14:34 ` Daniel Thompson
2018-08-15 14:43 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).