Re: [PATCH perf/core] perf tools: Add missing break for PERF_RECORD_ITRACE_START

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 02:17:18PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 29/06/15 14:12, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > Missing switch break since introduction of new event:
> >   c4937a91ea56 perf tools: handle PERF_RECORD_LOST_SAMPLES
> > 
> > Cc: Kan Liang <kan.liang@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/n/tip-e3gbrp2561x2s9tkqvf2wh9n@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  tools/perf/util/machine.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/machine.c b/tools/perf/util/machine.c
> > index 4744673aff1b..a08e38339cac 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/util/machine.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/machine.c
> > @@ -1448,7 +1448,7 @@ int machine__process_event(struct machine *machine, union perf_event *event,
> >  	case PERF_RECORD_AUX:
> >  		ret = machine__process_aux_event(machine, event); break;
> >  	case PERF_RECORD_ITRACE_START:
> > -		ret = machine__process_itrace_start_event(machine, event);
> > +		ret = machine__process_itrace_start_event(machine, event); break;
> >  	case PERF_RECORD_LOST_SAMPLES:
> >  		ret = machine__process_lost_samples_event(machine, event, sample); break;
> >  		break;
> 
> But now you have break; break;
> 
> Isn't putting 'break' on the end of the line making things harder to read?

I would tend to agree, its a very odd style.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/