| Message ID | 20201030004046.2191790-5-kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | silence the compiler warnings | expand |
Le 30/10/2020 à 01:40, Chen Qun a écrit : > When using -Wimplicit-fallthrough in our CFLAGS, the compiler showed warning: > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c: In function ‘cpu_loop’: > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:104:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > 104 | if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg8, sp_reg + 28)) != 0) { > | ^ > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:107:17: note: here > 107 | case 7: > | ^~~~ > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:108:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > 108 | if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg7, sp_reg + 24)) != 0) { > | ^ > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:111:17: note: here > 111 | case 6: > | ^~~~ > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:112:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > 112 | if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg6, sp_reg + 20)) != 0) { > | ^ > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:115:17: note: here > 115 | case 5: > | ^~~~ > > Add the corresponding "fall through" comment to fix it. > > Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.robot@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Chen Qun <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > --- > Cc: Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu> > --- > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c b/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c > index 553e8ca7f5..cfe7ba5c47 100644 > --- a/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c > +++ b/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c > @@ -104,18 +104,22 @@ void cpu_loop(CPUMIPSState *env) > if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg8, sp_reg + 28)) != 0) { > goto done_syscall; > } > + /* fall through */ > case 7: > if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg7, sp_reg + 24)) != 0) { > goto done_syscall; > } > + /* fall through */ > case 6: > if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg6, sp_reg + 20)) != 0) { > goto done_syscall; > } > + /* fall through */ > case 5: > if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg5, sp_reg + 16)) != 0) { > goto done_syscall; > } > + /* fall through */ > default: > break; > } > Reviewed-by: Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu>
Le 30/10/2020 à 01:40, Chen Qun a écrit : > When using -Wimplicit-fallthrough in our CFLAGS, the compiler showed warning: > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c: In function ‘cpu_loop’: > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:104:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > 104 | if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg8, sp_reg + 28)) != 0) { > | ^ > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:107:17: note: here > 107 | case 7: > | ^~~~ > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:108:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > 108 | if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg7, sp_reg + 24)) != 0) { > | ^ > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:111:17: note: here > 111 | case 6: > | ^~~~ > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:112:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > 112 | if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg6, sp_reg + 20)) != 0) { > | ^ > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:115:17: note: here > 115 | case 5: > | ^~~~ > > Add the corresponding "fall through" comment to fix it. > > Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.robot@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Chen Qun <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > --- > Cc: Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu> > --- > linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c b/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c > index 553e8ca7f5..cfe7ba5c47 100644 > --- a/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c > +++ b/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c > @@ -104,18 +104,22 @@ void cpu_loop(CPUMIPSState *env) > if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg8, sp_reg + 28)) != 0) { > goto done_syscall; > } > + /* fall through */ > case 7: > if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg7, sp_reg + 24)) != 0) { > goto done_syscall; > } > + /* fall through */ > case 6: > if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg6, sp_reg + 20)) != 0) { > goto done_syscall; > } > + /* fall through */ > case 5: > if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg5, sp_reg + 16)) != 0) { > goto done_syscall; > } > + /* fall through */ > default: > break; > } > Applied to my linux-user-for-5.2 branch. Thanks, Laurent
diff --git a/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c b/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c index 553e8ca7f5..cfe7ba5c47 100644 --- a/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c +++ b/linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c @@ -104,18 +104,22 @@ void cpu_loop(CPUMIPSState *env) if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg8, sp_reg + 28)) != 0) { goto done_syscall; } + /* fall through */ case 7: if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg7, sp_reg + 24)) != 0) { goto done_syscall; } + /* fall through */ case 6: if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg6, sp_reg + 20)) != 0) { goto done_syscall; } + /* fall through */ case 5: if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg5, sp_reg + 16)) != 0) { goto done_syscall; } + /* fall through */ default: break; }
When using -Wimplicit-fallthrough in our CFLAGS, the compiler showed warning: linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c: In function ‘cpu_loop’: linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:104:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] 104 | if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg8, sp_reg + 28)) != 0) { | ^ linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:107:17: note: here 107 | case 7: | ^~~~ linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:108:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] 108 | if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg7, sp_reg + 24)) != 0) { | ^ linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:111:17: note: here 111 | case 6: | ^~~~ linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:112:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] 112 | if ((ret = get_user_ual(arg6, sp_reg + 20)) != 0) { | ^ linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c:115:17: note: here 115 | case 5: | ^~~~ Add the corresponding "fall through" comment to fix it. Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.robot@huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Chen Qun <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> --- Cc: Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu> --- linux-user/mips/cpu_loop.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)