Re: [PATCH] afs: Mark expected switch fall-throughs

[David Howells]

Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> +		/* Fall through */
>  	no_msw:
>  		/* extract the returned data length */
>  	case 2:

That would appear to be added in the wrong place.  The fall-through is after
the no_msw label.

> +
> +		/* Fall through */
>  	no_volname_padding:

Ditto - and several other dittos too.

> -		/* Done */
> +		/* Fall through - Done */

Yuck.

> +
> +		/* fall through */

Capital 'F' for consistency please.

Whilst I understand the argument for explicitly marking the fall-throughs to
catch missing breaks, it's a bit irritating at times.  Can we have an
additional annotation that tells the compiler that every case in a switch
statement is going to fall through (so no break before case) except the last?
That would be more useful in this case.

David