> After I'd completed the warning, I kicked off a bootstrap so as to add > various gcc_fallthrough calls. There were a good amount of them, as > expected. I also grepped various FALLTHRU/Falls through/...fall > thru.../... comments in config/ and added gcc_fallthroughs to make it > easier for people. Wherever I wasn't sure that the gcc_fallthrough was > appropriate, I added an 'XXX' comment. This must not be relied upon as I > don't know most of the compiler code. The same goes for relevant libraries > where I introduced various gomp_fallthrough macros conditional on __GNUC__ > (I'd tried to use a configure check but then decided I won't put up with > all the vagaries of autoconf).
Do we really want to clutter up the entire tree like that? The result is particularly ugly IMO. Just add -Wno-switch-fallthrough somewhere I'd say. -- Eric Botcazou
