On 09.06.2021 14:49, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 09/06/2021 11:34, Jan Beulich wrote: >> The CIDs below are all for the PV side of things, but also take care of >> the HVM side. >> >> Coverity-ID: 1485896, 1485901, 1485906, 1485910, 1485911, >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> >> --- >> Let's see whether Coverity actually understands the (relatively) new >> pseudo-keyword. > > This is exceedingly disappointing. Coverity used to have the only > sensible rule for not causing spurious fallthrough warnings, but this > has apparently regressed.
Actually - where do you see a regression here? These cases of fall-through have been entirely un-annotated so far, so I'm instead surprised that apparently there were no warnings so far. Or maybe they had been marked false-positive in some database, and some unrelated code change made Coverity think this was new / changed code. Jan
