On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 01:27:51PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 07/22/2016 01:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > @@ -32335,6 +32341,7 @@ rs6000_handle_altivec_attribute (tree *node,
> > > case V4SImode: case V8HImode: case V16QImode: case V4SFmode:
> > > case V2DImode: case V2DFmode:
> > > result = type;
> > > + gcc_fallthrough ();
> > > default: break;
> > > }
> > > break;
> > > @@ -32345,6 +32352,7 @@ rs6000_handle_altivec_attribute (tree *node,
> > > case SImode: case V4SImode: result = bool_V4SI_type_node; break;
> > > case HImode: case V8HImode: result = bool_V8HI_type_node; break;
> > > case QImode: case V16QImode: result = bool_V16QI_type_node;
> > > + gcc_fallthrough ();
> > > default: break;
> > > }
> > > break;
> > > @@ -32352,6 +32360,7 @@ rs6000_handle_altivec_attribute (tree *node,
> > > switch (mode)
> > > {
> > > case V8HImode: result = pixel_V8HI_type_node;
> > > + gcc_fallthrough ();
> > > default: break;
> > > }
> > > default: break;
> >
> > I thought we don't warn on these anymore?
>
> Also, please just add a break for cases like this. The last one ought to be
> an if statement in any case.
With the current version code like that shouldn't need any adjustments since
we shouldn't warn on it.
Marek
