On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 at 15:24, Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> From: Chen Qun <kuhn.chen...@huawei.com>
>
> When using -Wimplicit-fallthrough in our CFLAGS, the compiler showed warning:
> ../hw/timer/renesas_tmr.c: In function ‘tmr_read’:
> ../hw/timer/renesas_tmr.c:221:19: warning: this statement may fall through
> [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
> 221 | } else if (ch == 0) {i
> | ^
> ../hw/timer/renesas_tmr.c:224:5: note: here
> 224 | case A_TCORB:
> | ^~~~
>
> Add the corresponding "fall through" comment to fix it.
>
> Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.ro...@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Qun <kuhn.chen...@huawei.com>
> Message-Id: <20201028041819.2169003-10-kuhn.chen...@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com>
> ---
> hw/timer/renesas_tmr.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/hw/timer/renesas_tmr.c b/hw/timer/renesas_tmr.c
> index 446f2eacdd..e03a8155b2 100644
> --- a/hw/timer/renesas_tmr.c
> +++ b/hw/timer/renesas_tmr.c
> @@ -221,6 +221,7 @@ static uint64_t tmr_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr,
> unsigned size)
> } else if (ch == 0) {
> return concat_reg(tmr->tcora);
> }
> + /* fall through */
> case A_TCORB:
> if (size == 1) {
> return tmr->tcorb[ch];
Yes, but maybe we should just get the patch that
refactors this code in instead ?
thanks
-- PMM
