Hi Thomas, On 8/5/20 11:12 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 04/08/2020 09:38, Adrian Moreno: >> The PREFER_FALLTHROUGH check warns if a passthrough comment is found >> because, in the kernel, the special macro "fallthrough" is prefered. >> >> Since that keyword is not defined in DPDK, ignore the warning. > > We could ask why not defining a similar keyword? >
Surely, we can also add the keyword. Given that unintended fallthrough is already protected by the "MISSING_BREAK" and that fallthrough comments are already used in DPDK, I thought it made sense to ignore the check. If you prefer to add the keyword, let me ask: - Where is the right place for it? Maybe rte_common.h? - Should all the comments be replaced with the pseudo-keyword? >> >> Ignoring this check does not affect the MISSING_BREAK check that will >> warn if a switch case/default is not preceded by break or a fallthrough >> comment. >> >> Signed-off-by: Adrian Moreno <amore...@redhat.com> >> --- >> devtools/checkpatches.sh | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/devtools/checkpatches.sh b/devtools/checkpatches.sh >> index acf921ae0..4283ca82b 100755 >> --- a/devtools/checkpatches.sh >> +++ b/devtools/checkpatches.sh >> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ VOLATILE,PREFER_PACKED,PREFER_ALIGNED,PREFER_PRINTF,\ >> PREFER_KERNEL_TYPES,BIT_MACRO,CONST_STRUCT,\ >> SPLIT_STRING,LONG_LINE_STRING,C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE,\ >> LINE_SPACING,PARENTHESIS_ALIGNMENT,NETWORKING_BLOCK_COMMENT_STYLE,\ >> -NEW_TYPEDEFS,COMPARISON_TO_NULL" >> +NEW_TYPEDEFS,COMPARISON_TO_NULL,PREFER_FALLTHROUGH" > > I would add this option between PREFER_KERNEL_TYPES and BIT_MACRO > to maintain a bit of logic ordering. > OK. I'll reorder it if the final decision is to ignore the check. Thanks -- Adrián Moreno
