[PATCH] iio: dpot-dac: fix code comment in dpot_dac_read_raw()

[PATCH] iio: dpot-dac: fix code comment in dpot_dac_read_raw()

[Gustavo A. R. Silva]

After the replacement of the /* fall through */ comment with the
fallthrough pseudo-keyword macro, the natural reading of a code
comment was broken.

Fix the natural reading of such a comment and make it intelligible.

Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
---
 drivers/iio/dac/dpot-dac.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iio/dac/dpot-dac.c b/drivers/iio/dac/dpot-dac.c
index be61c3b01e8b..1a9609eda5c5 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/dac/dpot-dac.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/dac/dpot-dac.c
@@ -74,10 +74,11 @@ static int dpot_dac_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
 		case IIO_VAL_INT:
 			/*
 			 * Convert integer scale to fractional scale by
-			 * setting the denominator (val2) to one, and...
+			 * setting the denominator (val2) to one...
 			 */
 			*val2 = 1;
 			ret = IIO_VAL_FRACTIONAL;
+			/* ...and fall through. Say it again for GCC. */
 			fallthrough;
 		case IIO_VAL_FRACTIONAL:
 			*val *= regulator_get_voltage(dac->vref) / 1000;
-- 
2.27.0

Re: [PATCH] iio: dpot-dac: fix code comment in dpot_dac_read_raw()

[Peter Rosin]

Hi!

On 2020-08-26 02:08, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> After the replacement of the /* fall through */ comment with the
> fallthrough pseudo-keyword macro, the natural reading of a code
> comment was broken.
> 
> Fix the natural reading of such a comment and make it intelligible.
> 
> Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>

Excellent, thanks for the quick turnaround!

And just to be explicit, this fix is for 5.9.

Acked-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>

Cheers,
Peter

Re: [PATCH] iio: dpot-dac: fix code comment in dpot_dac_read_raw()

[Peter Rosin]

On 2020-08-26 16:17, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> And just to be explicit, this fix is for 5.9.
>>
>> Acked-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
>>
> 
> If you don't mind I can add this to my tree for 5.9-rc4
> and send it directly to Linus.

Fine by me, Jonathan might think differently but I can't find a reason why.
Just about nothing is happening in that file and the risk for conflicts is
negligible.

Cheers,
Peter

Re: [PATCH] iio: dpot-dac: fix code comment in dpot_dac_read_raw()

[Gustavo A. R. Silva]

Hi,

On 8/26/20 02:04, Peter Rosin wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> On 2020-08-26 02:08, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> After the replacement of the /* fall through */ comment with the
>> fallthrough pseudo-keyword macro, the natural reading of a code
>> comment was broken.
>>
>> Fix the natural reading of such a comment and make it intelligible.
>>
>> Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
> 
> Excellent, thanks for the quick turnaround!
> 

No problem. :)

> And just to be explicit, this fix is for 5.9.
> 
> Acked-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
> 

If you don't mind I can add this to my tree for 5.9-rc4
and send it directly to Linus.

Thanks
--
Gustavo

Re: [PATCH] iio: dpot-dac: fix code comment in dpot_dac_read_raw()

[Gustavo A. R. Silva]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 04:16:23PM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2020-08-26 16:17, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> >> And just to be explicit, this fix is for 5.9.
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
> >>
> > 
> > If you don't mind I can add this to my tree for 5.9-rc4
> > and send it directly to Linus.
> 
> Fine by me, Jonathan might think differently but I can't find a reason why.
> Just about nothing is happening in that file and the risk for conflicts is
> negligible.
> 

OK. In the meantime, I have added this to my -next tree and queued it up
for 5.9-rc3.

Thanks
--
Gustavo

Re: [PATCH] iio: dpot-dac: fix code comment in dpot_dac_read_raw()

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 14:25:29 -0500
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 04:16:23PM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
> > On 2020-08-26 16:17, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:  
> > >> And just to be explicit, this fix is for 5.9.
> > >>
> > >> Acked-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
> > >>  
> > > 
> > > If you don't mind I can add this to my tree for 5.9-rc4
> > > and send it directly to Linus.  
> > 
> > Fine by me, Jonathan might think differently but I can't find a reason why.
> > Just about nothing is happening in that file and the risk for conflicts is
> > negligible.
> >   
> 
> OK. In the meantime, I have added this to my -next tree and queued it up
> for 5.9-rc3.
Absolutely fine by me.

Thanks,

Jonathan

> 
> Thanks
> --
> Gustavo