Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Checkpatch query | From | Joe Perches <> | Date | Mon, 21 Jul 2014 06:06:25 -0700 |
| |
On Mon, 2014-07-21 at 12:39 +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > Hi Andy, Joe,
Hi Lee.
> When running checkpatch on drivers/mfd/tps80031.c I recieve the > following warning: > > > WARNING: Possible switch case/default not preceeded by break or > > fallthrough comment > > #337: FILE: drivers/mfd/tps80031.c:337: > > + case TPS80031_BACKUP_REG: > > > > total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 573 lines checked > > ... but we use switch statement fall through all the time when > identifying different types of registers used with Regmap. Placing a > fall-through comment between them all sounds very messy to me.
Yes, it can be messy, but it's found some actual bugs/defects.
> Also, the warning only fires on 'case's which do not use '...' > notation, which seems a little odd.
That's a checkpatch defect. Thanks for the report.
> Anyway, I'm not sure placing a 'fall through' comment makes the code > any cleaner or reduces possible failure rate in any way. Is there any > chance that this check can be removed?
You could use the --ignore= cmd-line option or add it to a .checkpatch.conf file.
$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -f drivers/mfd/tps80031.c --ignore=missing_break WARNING: Possible unnecessary 'out of memory' message #435: FILE: drivers/mfd/tps80031.c:435: + if (!tps80031) { + dev_err(&client->dev, "Malloc failed for tps80031\n");
total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 573 lines checked
NOTE: Ignored message types: MISSING_BREAK
drivers/mfd/tps80031.c has style problems, please review.
If any of these errors are false positives, please report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.
| |