Hi! On 08/08/2019 04:38, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
Mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through.Fix the following warnings (Building: arm-ep93xx_defconfig arm): arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/crunch.c: In function 'crunch_do': arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/crunch.c:46:3: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] memset(crunch_state, 0, sizeof(*crunch_state)); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/crunch.c:53:2: note: here case THREAD_NOTIFY_EXIT: ^~~~ Notice that, in this particular case, the code comment is modified in accordance with what GCC is expecting to find. Reported-by: kbuild test robot <l...@intel.com>
Acked-by: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverd...@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gust...@embeddedor.com> --- arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/crunch.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/crunch.c b/arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/crunch.c index 1c9a4be8b503..1c05c5bf7e5c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/crunch.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/crunch.c @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ static int crunch_do(struct notifier_block *self, unsigned long cmd, void *t) * FALLTHROUGH: Ensure we don't try to overwrite our newly * initialised state information on the first fault. */ + /* Fall through */case THREAD_NOTIFY_EXIT:crunch_task_release(thread);
