Re: [PATCH] net: sctp: Rename fallthrough label to unhandled

[Neil Horman]

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 10:04:37PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> fallthrough may become a pseudo reserved keyword so this only use of
> fallthrough is better renamed to allow it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c | 12 ++++++------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c b/net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c
> index 36bd8a6e82df..3fdcaa2fbf12 100644
> --- a/net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c
> +++ b/net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c
> @@ -2152,7 +2152,7 @@ static enum sctp_ierror sctp_verify_param(struct net *net,
>  	case SCTP_PARAM_SET_PRIMARY:
>  		if (net->sctp.addip_enable)
>  			break;
> -		goto fallthrough;
> +		goto unhandled;
>  
>  	case SCTP_PARAM_HOST_NAME_ADDRESS:
>  		/* Tell the peer, we won't support this param.  */
> @@ -2163,11 +2163,11 @@ static enum sctp_ierror sctp_verify_param(struct net *net,
>  	case SCTP_PARAM_FWD_TSN_SUPPORT:
>  		if (ep->prsctp_enable)
>  			break;
> -		goto fallthrough;
> +		goto unhandled;
>  
>  	case SCTP_PARAM_RANDOM:
>  		if (!ep->auth_enable)
> -			goto fallthrough;
> +			goto unhandled;
>  
>  		/* SCTP-AUTH: Secion 6.1
>  		 * If the random number is not 32 byte long the association
> @@ -2184,7 +2184,7 @@ static enum sctp_ierror sctp_verify_param(struct net *net,
>  
>  	case SCTP_PARAM_CHUNKS:
>  		if (!ep->auth_enable)
> -			goto fallthrough;
> +			goto unhandled;
>  
>  		/* SCTP-AUTH: Section 3.2
>  		 * The CHUNKS parameter MUST be included once in the INIT or
> @@ -2200,7 +2200,7 @@ static enum sctp_ierror sctp_verify_param(struct net *net,
>  
>  	case SCTP_PARAM_HMAC_ALGO:
>  		if (!ep->auth_enable)
> -			goto fallthrough;
> +			goto unhandled;
>  
>  		hmacs = (struct sctp_hmac_algo_param *)param.p;
>  		n_elt = (ntohs(param.p->length) -
> @@ -2223,7 +2223,7 @@ static enum sctp_ierror sctp_verify_param(struct net *net,
>  			retval = SCTP_IERROR_ABORT;
>  		}
>  		break;
> -fallthrough:
> +unhandled:
>  	default:
>  		pr_debug("%s: unrecognized param:%d for chunk:%d\n",
>  			 __func__, ntohs(param.p->type), cid);
> -- 
> 2.15.0
> 
> 
Yeah, it seems reasonable to me, though I'm still not comfortable with defining
fallthrough as a macrotized keyword, but thats a debate for another thread

Acked-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>