From: Gustavo A. R. Silva Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 19:30:39 +0000 (-0600) Subject: scsi: lpfc: lpfc_hbadisc: Mark expected switch fall-throughs X-Git-Tag: v5.2-rc1~156^2~15 X-Git-Url: https://asedeno.scripts.mit.edu/gitweb/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=f60deecb96616ae188b08ba99a6d8fb41ee7a48f;p=linux.git scsi: lpfc: lpfc_hbadisc: Mark expected switch fall-throughs In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Notice that, in this particular case, I replaced "Drop thru" with a "fall through" annotation, which is what GCC is expecting to find. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114976 ("Missing break in switch") Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114977 ("Missing break in switch") Reviewed-by: Kees Cook Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva --- diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c index aa4961a2caf8..14fffbebbbb5 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c @@ -4667,9 +4667,11 @@ lpfc_check_sli_ndlp(struct lpfc_hba *phba, case CMD_GEN_REQUEST64_CR: if (iocb->context_un.ndlp == ndlp) return 1; + /* fall through */ case CMD_ELS_REQUEST64_CR: if (icmd->un.elsreq64.remoteID == ndlp->nlp_DID) return 1; + /* fall through */ case CMD_XMIT_ELS_RSP64_CX: if (iocb->context1 == (uint8_t *) ndlp) return 1; @@ -5856,7 +5858,7 @@ lpfc_disc_timeout_handler(struct lpfc_vport *vport) case LPFC_LINK_UP: lpfc_issue_clear_la(phba, vport); - /* Drop thru */ + /* fall through */ case LPFC_LINK_UNKNOWN: case LPFC_WARM_START: case LPFC_INIT_START: