Re: [PATCH] iio: accel: cros_ec_accel_legacy: Mark expected switch fall-throughs

[Marcus Folkesson]

Hi,

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 11:38:52AM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
> where we are expecting to fall through.
> 
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1462408 ("Missing break in switch")
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gust...@embeddedor.com>
> ---
>  drivers/iio/accel/cros_ec_accel_legacy.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/cros_ec_accel_legacy.c 
> b/drivers/iio/accel/cros_ec_accel_legacy.c
> index 063e89e..d609654 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/accel/cros_ec_accel_legacy.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/cros_ec_accel_legacy.c
> @@ -385,8 +385,10 @@ static int cros_ec_accel_legacy_probe(struct 
> platform_device *pdev)
>               switch (i) {
>               case X:
>                       ec_accel_channels[X].scan_index = Y;
> +                     /* fall through */
>               case Y:
>                       ec_accel_channels[Y].scan_index = X;
> +                     /* fall through */
>               case Z:
>                       ec_accel_channels[Z].scan_index = Z;
>               }

Hum, I'm not sure we are supposed to fall through here, even if it does
not hurt to do so.
I even think we can remove the switch and put that outside the for-loop,
e.g:

        ec_accel_channels[X].scan_index = Y;
        ec_accel_channels[Y].scan_index = X;
        ec_accel_channels[Z].scan_index = Z;

        for (i = X ; i < MAX_AXIS; i++) {
                if (state->sensor_num == MOTIONSENSE_LOC_LID && i != Y)
                        state->sign[i] = -1;
                else
                        state->sign[i] = 1;
        }


Best regards,
Marcus Folkesson


> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature