Re: [PATCH RESEND][next] rtl8xxxu: Fix fall-through warnings for Clang

[Joe Perches]

On Sat, 2021-04-17 at 14:30 -0400, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> On 4/17/21 1:52 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> > "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > In preparation to enable -Wimplicit-fallthrough for Clang, fix
> > > multiple warnings by replacing /* fall through */ comments with
> > > the new pseudo-keyword macro fallthrough; instead of letting the
> > > code fall through to the next case.
> > > 
> > > Notice that Clang doesn't recognize /* fall through */ comments as
> > > implicit fall-through markings.
> > > 
> > > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/115
> > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Patch applied to wireless-drivers-next.git, thanks.
> > 
> > bf3365a856a1 rtl8xxxu: Fix fall-through warnings for Clang
> > 
> 
> Sorry this junk patch should not have been applied.

I don't believe it's a junk patch.
I believe your characterization of it as such is flawed.

You don't like the style, that's fine, but:

Any code in the kernel should not be a unique style of your own choosing
when it could cause various compilers to emit unnecessary warnings.

Please remember the kernel code base is a formed by a community with a
nominally generally accepted style.  There is a real desire in that
community to both enable compiler warnings that might show defects and
simultaneously avoid unnecessary compiler warnings.

This particular change just avoids a possible compiler warning.