Re: [PATCH] net: smc_close: mark expected switch fall-throughs

[David Miller]

From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 20:21:00 -0500

> 
> Quoting David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> 
>> From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 17:02:44 -0500
>>
>>> @@ -360,7 +360,8 @@ static void smc_close_passive_work(struct
>>> work_struct *work)
>>>  	case SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT1:
>>>  		if (rxflags->peer_done_writing)
>>>  			sk->sk_state = SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT2;
>>> -		/* fall through to check for closing */
>>> +		/* to check for closing */
>>> +		/* fall through */
>>
>> Gustavo please look at what you are doing to the code.
>>
>> This was a nice easy to read sentence in the comment, and now
>> you've chopped it up into two pieces and made it awkward and
>> more difficult to read.
> 
> You're right.
> 
> What about this instead:
> 
> /* fall through */
> /* to check for closing */

I'm surprised gcc cares if it's all on one line or not, actually.