Re: [PATCH 24/41] scsi: lpfc: lpfc_hbadisc: Mark expected switch fall-throughs

[Gustavo A. R. Silva]

Hi,

Friendly ping (second one):

Who can ack/review/take this patch, please?

Thanks
--
Gustavo

On 11/27/18 10:31 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> Notice that, in this particular case, I replaced "Drop thru" with a
> "fall through" annotation, which is what GCC is expecting to find.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114976 ("Missing break in switch")
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114977 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c | 4 +++-
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c
> index 6c2fb55d739b..1a61806739ff 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c
> @@ -4645,9 +4645,11 @@ lpfc_check_sli_ndlp(struct lpfc_hba *phba,
>   		case CMD_GEN_REQUEST64_CR:
>   			if (iocb->context_un.ndlp == ndlp)
>   				return 1;
> +			/* fall through */
>   		case CMD_ELS_REQUEST64_CR:
>   			if (icmd->un.elsreq64.remoteID == ndlp->nlp_DID)
>   				return 1;
> +			/* fall through */
>   		case CMD_XMIT_ELS_RSP64_CX:
>   			if (iocb->context1 == (uint8_t *) ndlp)
>   				return 1;
> @@ -5791,7 +5793,7 @@ lpfc_disc_timeout_handler(struct lpfc_vport *vport)
>   
>   	case LPFC_LINK_UP:
>   		lpfc_issue_clear_la(phba, vport);
> -		/* Drop thru */
> +		/* fall through */
>   	case LPFC_LINK_UNKNOWN:
>   	case LPFC_WARM_START:
>   	case LPFC_INIT_START: