Messages in this thread | | | From | "Vaittinen, Matti" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] gpio: bd70528: remove unneeded break | Date | Tue, 20 Oct 2020 11:48:29 +0000 |
| |
On Tue, 2020-10-20 at 13:07 +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > Thanks Tom, > > On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:33 -0700, trix@redhat.com wrote: > > From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com> > > > > A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return > > > > Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpio/gpio-bd70528.c | 3 --- > > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd70528.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio- > > bd70528.c > > index 45b3da8da336..931e5765fe92 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd70528.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd70528.c > > @@ -71,17 +71,14 @@ static int bd70528_gpio_set_config(struct > > gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset, > > GPIO_OUT_REG(offset), > > BD70528_GPIO_DRIVE_MASK, > > BD70528_GPIO_OPEN_DRAIN); > > - break; > My personal taste is also to omit these breaks but I am pretty sure I > saw some tooling issuing a warning about falling through the switch- > case back when I wrote this. Most probably checkpatch didn't like > that > back then.
I did a test and removed the breaks. Then I copied the modified file to drivers/gpio/dummy.c Next I committed this dummy.c in git, ran git-format-patch -s and finally ran the checkpatch on this... Following was produced:
[mvaittin@localhost linux]$ scripts/checkpatch.pl 0001-gpio-add- dummy.patch Traceback (most recent call last): File "scripts/spdxcheck.py", line 6, in <module> from ply import lex, yacc ImportError: No module named ply WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating? #15: new file mode 100644
WARNING: Possible switch case/default not preceded by break or fallthrough comment #91: FILE: drivers/gpio/dummy.c:72: + case PIN_CONFIG_DRIVE_PUSH_PULL:
WARNING: Possible switch case/default not preceded by break or fallthrough comment #96: FILE: drivers/gpio/dummy.c:77: + case PIN_CONFIG_INPUT_DEBOUNCE:
total: 0 errors, 3 warnings, 229 lines checked
NOTE: For some of the reported defects, checkpatch may be able to mechanically convert to the typical style using --fix or --fix- inplace.
0001-gpio-add-dummy.patch has style problems, please review.
NOTE: If any of the errors are false positives, please report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.
I guess that explains the odd "fallthrough" comments you mentioned in another email. I guess the checkpatch should be fixed before you put too much effort in clean-up...
And for peeps who have not been following - following function triggers the checkpatch error above:
static int bd70528_gpio_set_config(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset, unsigned long config) { struct bd70528_gpio *bdgpio = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
switch (pinconf_to_config_param(config)) { case PIN_CONFIG_DRIVE_OPEN_DRAIN: return regmap_update_bits(bdgpio->chip.regmap, GPIO_OUT_REG(offset), BD70528_GPIO_DRIVE_MASK, BD70528_GPIO_OPEN_DRAIN); case PIN_CONFIG_DRIVE_PUSH_PULL: return regmap_update_bits(bdgpio->chip.regmap, GPIO_OUT_REG(offset), BD70528_GPIO_DRIVE_MASK, BD70528_GPIO_PUSH_PULL); case PIN_CONFIG_INPUT_DEBOUNCE: return bd70528_set_debounce(bdgpio, offset, pinconf_to_config_argument( config)); default: break; } return -ENOTSUPP; }
Best Regards Matti Vaittinen
| |