GCC9 is confused by this comment when building with CFLAG
-Wimplicit-fallthrough=2:
hw/net/imx_fec.c: In function ‘imx_eth_write’:
hw/net/imx_fec.c:906:12: error: this statement may fall through
[-Werror=implicit-fallthrough=]
906 | if (unlikely(single_tx_ring)) {
| ^
hw/net/imx_fec.c:912:5: note: here
912 | case ENET_TDAR: /* FALLTHROUGH */
| ^~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Rewrite the comments in the correct place, using 'fall through'
which is recognized by GCC and static analyzers.
Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Aleksandar Markovic <amarko...@wavecomp.com>
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com>
---
Cc: Peter Chubb <peter.ch...@nicta.com.au>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
Cc: Jason Wang <jasow...@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-...@nongnu.org
---
hw/net/imx_fec.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/hw/net/imx_fec.c b/hw/net/imx_fec.c
index bd99236864..c01ce4f078 100644
--- a/hw/net/imx_fec.c
+++ b/hw/net/imx_fec.c
@@ -909,7 +909,8 @@ static void imx_eth_write(void *opaque, hwaddr offset,
uint64_t value,
TYPE_IMX_FEC, __func__);
return;
}
- case ENET_TDAR: /* FALLTHROUGH */
+ /* fall through */
+ case ENET_TDAR:
if (s->regs[ENET_ECR] & ENET_ECR_ETHEREN) {
s->regs[index] = ENET_TDAR_TDAR;
imx_eth_do_tx(s, index);
--
2.21.0
