drm/radeon/r300: Mark expected switch fall-throughs
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Notice that in this particular case, I replaced "Pass through." with "Fall through.", which is what GCC is expecting to find. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114734 ("Missing break in switch") Addresses-Coverity-ID: 114735 ("Missing break in switch") Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
fa2549800c
commit
657f600397
@ -814,7 +814,7 @@ static int r300_packet0_check(struct radeon_cs_parser *p,
|
||||
((idx_value >> 21) & 0xF));
|
||||
return -EINVAL;
|
||||
}
|
||||
/* Pass through. */
|
||||
/* Fall through. */
|
||||
case 6:
|
||||
track->cb[i].cpp = 4;
|
||||
break;
|
||||
@ -965,7 +965,7 @@ static int r300_packet0_check(struct radeon_cs_parser *p,
|
||||
return -EINVAL;
|
||||
}
|
||||
/* The same rules apply as for DXT3/5. */
|
||||
/* Pass through. */
|
||||
/* Fall through. */
|
||||
case R300_TX_FORMAT_DXT3:
|
||||
case R300_TX_FORMAT_DXT5:
|
||||
track->textures[i].cpp = 1;
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user