From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 20:35:30 -0500
Subject: net: smc_close: mark expected switch fall-through
Git-commit: 7f6b437e9b82a6d702a7f8f75c83ffdec6e03c54
Patch-mainline: v4.15-rc1
References: bsc#1096003, FATE#325023, LTC#164003

In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
where we are expecting to fall through.

Notice that in this particular case I placed the "fall through" comment
on its own line, which is what GCC is expecting to find.

Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
---
 net/smc/smc_close.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/smc/smc_close.c b/net/smc/smc_close.c
index f0d16fb825f7..a6c65595f248 100644
--- a/net/smc/smc_close.c
+++ b/net/smc/smc_close.c
@@ -360,7 +360,8 @@ static void smc_close_passive_work(struct work_struct *work)
 	case SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT1:
 		if (rxflags->peer_done_writing)
 			sk->sk_state = SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT2;
-		/* fall through to check for closing */
+		/* fall through */
+		/* to check for closing */
 	case SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT2:
 	case SMC_PEERFINCLOSEWAIT:
 		if (!smc_cdc_rxed_any_close(&smc->conn))