gcc 7 adds -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3 to -Wextra. There are a few ways
we could deal with that. After we take into account the need to stay compatible
with older versions of the compiler (and other compilers), I don't think adding
__attribute__((fallthrough)), even as a macro, is worth the trouble. It sticks
out too much, a comment is just as good. But gcc has some very specific
requiremnts how the comment should look. Adjust it the specific form that it
likes. I don't think the extra stuff we had in those comments was adding much
value.
(Note: the documentation seems to be wrong, and seems to describe a different
pattern from the one that is actually used. I guess either the docs or the code
will have to change before gcc 7 is finalized.)
switch (left) {
case 7:
state->padding |= ((uint64_t) in[6]) << 48;
+ /* fall through */
case 6:
state->padding |= ((uint64_t) in[5]) << 40;
+ /* fall through */
case 5:
state->padding |= ((uint64_t) in[4]) << 32;
+ /* fall through */
case 4:
state->padding |= ((uint64_t) in[3]) << 24;
+ /* fall through */
case 3:
state->padding |= ((uint64_t) in[2]) << 16;
+ /* fall through */
case 2:
state->padding |= ((uint64_t) in[1]) << 8;
+ /* fall through */
case 1:
state->padding |= ((uint64_t) in[0]);
+ /* fall through */
case 0:
break;
}
if (!clock_boottime_supported())
return false;
- /* fall through, after checking the cached value for CLOCK_BOOTTIME. */
+ /* fall through */
default:
/* For everything else, check properly */