[PATCH net-next] wimax: usb-tx: mark expected switch fall-through

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"
annotation at the bottom of the case, which is what GCC is expecting
to find.

Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115075 ("Missing break in switch")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c b/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c
index 99ef81b..3a0e722 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c

@@ -131,12 +131,12 @@ int i2400mu_tx(struct i2400mu *i2400mu, struct i2400m_msg_hdr *tx_msg,
 			dev_err(dev, "BM-CMD: too many stalls in "
 				"URB; resetting device\n");
 			usb_queue_reset_device(i2400mu->usb_iface);
-			/* fallthrough */
 		} else {
 			usb_clear_halt(i2400mu->usb_dev, usb_pipe);
 			msleep(10);	/* give the device some time */
 			goto retry;
 		}
+		/* fall through */
 	case -EINVAL:			/* while removing driver */
 	case -ENODEV:			/* dev disconnect ... */
 	case -ENOENT:			/* just ignore it */

-- 
2.7.4

From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <redacted>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2018 10:47:20 -0500

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"
annotation at the bottom of the case, which is what GCC is expecting
to find.

Addresses-Coverity-ID: 115075 ("Missing break in switch")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <redacted>

Applied.