From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BB34C43457 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 11:45:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCC2922282 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 11:45:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="NLt0GHi9" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2393814AbgJTLpu (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Oct 2020 07:45:50 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42894 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2393579AbgJTLpu (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Oct 2020 07:45:50 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x544.google.com (mail-pg1-x544.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::544]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51571C061755; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 04:45:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x544.google.com with SMTP id o3so909595pgr.11; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 04:45:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=E+sMvGQJ6Sbqoq9aGV8WWCZd3SUHN9ACUz/+BbiQqU0=; b=NLt0GHi9O1TZ+qqT7Z+NtNn0ZdJbC2Zs5PKB8cm3YI3quK0FbaB4oIZcCW0z0E6ukm A+sMkPsnHXBXQc9u4oDNh1hBD+I31CBUwflLsr8C6hwoMFUngCvHT3t3svRSyJEOQHPt F7gFoivZ24Y1oT2v1KGZ+jMW99VJSY5+aKlEliRpS3+aphEQ1w52zRAePWl3YldYok2z 5bNACDFcYuv19ED8BQS66PFjisxdBSe1omFrP12DvD+m3ciXl6b+OiU70QIi4QvMYDWc o1v4QKWmVYRZKSLg/EqTaAytp8as6U0uLLLGwJvP3yOvv2lcbaMRnn7XIDFn4jCY3fEX JRgw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=E+sMvGQJ6Sbqoq9aGV8WWCZd3SUHN9ACUz/+BbiQqU0=; b=ttEmSEpkrGnxFeVGcB3BpCPcoSyAqKE7AJQqDGkY07zWlqT+q+WvAUU7aO/vtQd8tQ Cx2R8/GQb1hfB7Xe/OlHKzU91fPy16fO1OnfhU++HfueO/E+KCbIt5XaqFAZVRe3AFtY KeYJcbedRiAx3QdhckgR0AHh4AkDP8T0CeAINT8qqA7O4ZU6dwRpxtSoGyaoh0n1nVId cdWGzVkaFsWcNzMXIPnG968MzqVHd5Y4DJxAk8pQMibR2hRq9hI5BUa8oMXJQAw0+PpU 6xcx5nofp8bKMWuJ/x0AiiCUgdmJwxg3RH9Sm61OxsvXXXPoDZhDIlYR5rSgWb8q52+O lDkg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533TC+iA0RZon148ZFvURrmWCbEK7L04yaMLdTQMyQz1SFUdQRKr juiiL/ROW4XgW+p+FHzAqZ0pAjFUlESOlFM3DxI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxZSsmUQZk1HAQQXbs0xwM781Dn5B1XLSDQzVljRre2Ya9BcURW4popkBCcFnC7fltKYOs3FF8Pb5xzeDmcw3M= X-Received: by 2002:a63:f908:: with SMTP id h8mr2330043pgi.203.1603194349831; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 04:45:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201019193353.13066-1-trix@redhat.com> <5b13773306265f89366b86afba71d2b4a4130e2b.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com> In-Reply-To: <5b13773306265f89366b86afba71d2b4a4130e2b.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com> From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 14:46:38 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: bd70528: remove unneeded break To: "Vaittinen, Matti" Cc: "bgolaszewski@baylibre.com" , "trix@redhat.com" , "linus.walleij@linaro.org" , linux-power , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 2:26 PM Vaittinen, Matti wrote: > On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:33 -0700, trix@redhat.com wrote: > > - break; > My personal taste is also to omit these breaks but I am pretty sure I > saw some tooling issuing a warning about falling through the switch- > case back when I wrote this. Most probably checkpatch didn't like that > back then. Anyways - if you have no warnings from any of the tools - > this indeed looks better (to me) without the break :) JFYI: it's a clang which actually *is* complaining for an extra break. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko