Linux 5.9 Lands Patch Adding Fallthrough Macro In 2,484 More Spots

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Linux 5.9 Lands Patch Adding Fallthrough Macro In 2,484 More Spots

A single patch coming in at nearly three thousand lines was merged on Monday for the Linux 5.9 kernel that make the use of the "fallthrough" macro more widespread throughout the kernel...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-5.9-Lot-More-Fallthrough

[starshipeleven]

Nothing could go wrong.

better not touch anything and let it rot

[WizardGed]

My Immediate question is if this is a "GCC"ism or if clang also understands this macro.

[muncrief]

This doesn't have anything to do with the patch discussed in this article, but for those having problems with VFIO passthrough on 5.9-rc1/rc2 a patch has been created that fixes the issue. The patch can be found at the top of the following bug report (or click on this - Fix sqo_mm accounting), and will be included in rc3.

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=209025

[flgram]

Hi Robert
I think the pass-through bug is not related to the fall-through change discussed above.
Glad anyway.

[muncrief]

Hi Robert
I think the pass-through bug is not related to the fall-through change discussed above.
Glad anyway.

You're correct, and I should have made that clear. I posted it here because this was the most current article on 5.9 and I wanted to get the word out to anyone who needed it. But I certainly should have done it in a less bumbling manner

EDIT:
I changed my post to be more clear.

[xnor]

Nothing could go wrong.

By replacing a comment with a hint that the compiler can actually understand? Please don't tell me you're a developer.

[caligula]

The funny thing is, the C programmers have argued for decades that C's implicit fall-through was a really great feature, maybe one of the best ones.

[smitty3268]

My Immediate question is if this is a "GCC"ism or if clang also understands this macro.

Looks like it should work just fine in clang.

[programmerjake]

The funny thing is, the C programmers have argued for decades that C's implicit fall-through was a really great feature, maybe one of the best ones.

it's a great feature but only if your perfect and never make mistakes, otherwise it's a pain. I recall spending 3 weeks looking for a bug that turned out to be where I forgot a break statement. (That was on Turbo C++ for DOS which I don't think had warnings for implicit fall-through.)