On 24.06.2024 11:04, Federico Serafini wrote:
> Add break or pseudo keyword fallthrough to address violations of
> MISRA C Rule 16.3: "An unconditional `break' statement shall terminate
> every switch-clause".
>
> No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Federico Serafini <[email protected]>
Technically the change fulfills its purpose, yet:
> @@ -1748,6 +1749,7 @@ static void io_check_error(const struct cpu_user_regs
> *regs)
> {
> case 'd': /* 'dom0' */
> nmi_hwdom_report(_XEN_NMIREASON_io_error);
> + fallthrough;
> case 'i': /* 'ignore' */
> break;
> default: /* 'fatal' */
> @@ -1768,6 +1770,7 @@ static void unknown_nmi_error(const struct
> cpu_user_regs *regs,
> {
> case 'd': /* 'dom0' */
> nmi_hwdom_report(_XEN_NMIREASON_unknown);
> + fallthrough;
> case 'i': /* 'ignore' */
> break;
> default: /* 'fatal' */
Falling through isn't really useful here. In such a case I think it would
be preferable to avoid the pseudo-keyword and use the shorter "break".
Jan
