Hi Boris, Boris Brezillon <[email protected]> wrote on Sat, 26 Jan 2019 17:54:29 +0100:
> On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 07:48:50 -0600 > "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hey Boris, > > > > On 1/26/19 3:52 AM, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:09:50 -0600 > > > "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c > > >> b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c > > >> index 933d1a629c51..d33e15dc4cdc 100644 > > >> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c > > >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c > > >> @@ -2251,9 +2251,10 @@ static int __init ns_init_module(void) > > >> > > >> switch (bbt) { > > >> case 2: > > >> - chip->bbt_options |= NAND_BBT_NO_OOB; > > >> + chip->bbt_options |= NAND_BBT_NO_OOB; > > >> + /* fall through */ > > >> case 1: > > >> - chip->bbt_options |= NAND_BBT_USE_FLASH; > > >> + chip->bbt_options |= NAND_BBT_USE_FLASH; > > > > > > You miss a '/* fall through */' here. > > > > > > > Not really. Notice that in this case the code falls through > > to a break statement. > > Still find it weird to mandate fall through comments in all cases but > this one... Yes please, even if there is no GCC warning I think you can add one here. Thanks, Miquèl
