nickdesaulniers added a comment. Testing this on the kernel with `-Wimplicit-fallthrough`, there's some additional cases that are still warning:
// mm/vmscan.c
1371 mapping = page_mapping(page);
1372 case PAGE_CLEAN: // -Wimplicit-fallthrough
1373 ; /* try to free the page below */
1374 }
// fs/nfs/nfs4client.c
611 nfs4_schedule_path_down_recovery(pos);
612 default: // -Wimplicit-fallthrough
613 goto out;
// drivers/hid/usbhid/hid-core.c
490 case -ESHUTDOWN: /* unplug */
491 unplug = 1;
492 case -EILSEQ: /* protocol error or unplug */ //
-Wimplicit-fallthrough...how?!
493 case -EPROTO: /* protocol error or unplug */
494 case -ECONNRESET: /* unlink */
495 case -ENOENT:
496 case -EPIPE: /* report not available */
497 break;
// security/keys/process_keys.c
782 default:
783 if (need_perm != KEY_AUTHTOKEN_OVERRIDE &&
784 need_perm != KEY_DEFER_PERM_CHECK)
785 goto invalid_key;
786 case 0: // -Wimplicit-fallthrough...how?!
787 break;
788 }
Ah, I think I need to reconsider the case that there is more than one
successor, or at least differentiate which successor is the fallthrough block,
rather than only checking blocks that have 1 successor.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D91895/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D91895
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
