2021-05-21 11:11:50

by Jiapeng Chong

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH] platform/x86: thinkpad_acpi: Fix inconsistent indenting

Eliminate the follow smatch warning:

drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c:7942 volume_write() warn:
inconsistent indenting.

Reported-by: Abaci Robot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Chong <[email protected]>
---
drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
index dd60c93..d0aa566 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
@@ -7939,7 +7939,7 @@ static int volume_write(char *buf)
} else if (sscanf(cmd, "level %u", &l) == 1 &&
l >= 0 && l <= TP_EC_VOLUME_MAX) {
new_level = l;
- continue;
+ continue;
}
}
if (strlencmp(cmd, "mute") == 0)
--
1.8.3.1


2021-05-21 20:11:43

by Hans de Goede

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: thinkpad_acpi: Fix inconsistent indenting

Hi,

On 5/21/21 11:38 AM, Jiapeng Chong wrote:
> Eliminate the follow smatch warning:
>
> drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c:7942 volume_write() warn:
> inconsistent indenting.
>
> Reported-by: Abaci Robot <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Chong <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> index dd60c93..d0aa566 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> @@ -7939,7 +7939,7 @@ static int volume_write(char *buf)
> } else if (sscanf(cmd, "level %u", &l) == 1 &&
> l >= 0 && l <= TP_EC_VOLUME_MAX) {
> new_level = l;
> - continue;
> + continue;
> }
> }
> if (strlencmp(cmd, "mute") == 0)

Thank you for your patch, but actually the indentation of the "new_level = l;"
is wrong, it is indented one level too much.

Please send a new version changing (reducing) the indentation of the
"new_level = l;" statement instead.

Regards,

Hans