Re: [PATCH 2/2] bpf: annotate implicit fall through

[Daniel Borkmann]

On 01/15/2019 10:03 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> On 14.01.2019 23:29, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> 
>> There is a plan to build the kernel with -Wimplicit-fallthrough and
>> thise place in the code produced a warnings (W=1).
> 
> ÂÂ This?
> 
>> In this particular case change a â:â with a â,â so as to match the
>> regular expression expected by GCC.
>>
>> This commit remove the following warning:
>>
>> ÂÂ net/core/filter.c:5310:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@xxxxxxxxxx>

Please respin and also make the two subject lines not exactly the same.

Thanks,
Daniel

>> ---
>> Â net/core/filter.c | 2 +-
>> Â 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
>> index 447dd1bad31f..c8069a142994 100644
>> --- a/net/core/filter.c
>> +++ b/net/core/filter.c
>> @@ -5309,7 +5309,7 @@ bpf_base_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
>> ÂÂÂÂÂ case BPF_FUNC_trace_printk:
>> ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ if (capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
>> ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ return bpf_get_trace_printk_proto();
>> -ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ /* else: fall through */
>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ /* else, fall through */
> 
> ÂÂ The other patches seem to just drop "else:"...
> 
>> ÂÂÂÂÂ default:
>> ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ return NULL;
>> ÂÂÂÂÂ }
>>
> 
> MBR, Sergei