From b1fed3edc82ae0d763d5c24769e4a0193da150c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 17:38:54 -0500 Subject: Smack: Mark expected switch fall-through In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Notice that in this particular case, I replaced "No break" with a proper "Fall through" annotation, which is what GCC is expecting to find. Warning level 2 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=2 Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115051 ("Missing break in switch") Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler --- security/smack/smack_lsm.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'security/smack') diff --git a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c index 70d3066e69fe..2f5485cbf5ca 100644 --- a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c +++ b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c @@ -3474,7 +3474,7 @@ static void smack_d_instantiate(struct dentry *opt_dentry, struct inode *inode) */ final = &smack_known_star; /* - * No break. + * Fall through. * * If a smack value has been set we want to use it, * but since tmpfs isn't giving us the opportunity -- cgit v1.2.3-59-g8ed1b