On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:42:31AM +0200, Matthias Beyer wrote:
> The inner if-statement was aligned just like the outer one. Why?
>
> This indention was introduced by
>
> f34c488c3894968e8cdbdc3b1ed617d78315cace
>
> which is a indention-fix patch itself. That's why I'm curious about it.
>
> I did not merge these nested if-statements, as I don't know if I'm
> destroying logical seperated checks with it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthias Beyer <m...@beyermatthias.de>
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org>
> drivers/staging/bcm/DDRInit.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/bcm/DDRInit.c b/drivers/staging/bcm/DDRInit.c
> index cfaa2c1..d13cb49 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/bcm/DDRInit.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/bcm/DDRInit.c
> @@ -1308,11 +1308,11 @@ int download_ddr_settings(struct bcm_mini_adapter
> *Adapter)
> if (!retval) {
> if (bOverrideSelfRefresh && (psDDRSetting->ulRegAddress
> == 0x0F007018)) {
> value = (psDDRSetting->ulRegValue | (1<<8));
> - if (STATUS_SUCCESS != wrmalt(Adapter,
> ul_ddr_setting_load_addr,
> - &value, sizeof(value))) {
> - BCM_DEBUG_PRINT(Adapter, DBG_TYPE_PRINTK, 0, 0,
> "%s:%d\n", __func__, __LINE__);
> - break;
> - }
> + if (STATUS_SUCCESS != wrmalt(Adapter,
> ul_ddr_setting_load_addr,
> + &value, sizeof(value))) {
> + BCM_DEBUG_PRINT(Adapter,
> DBG_TYPE_PRINTK, 0, 0, "%s:%d\n", __func__, __LINE__);
> + break;
> + }
> } else {
> value = psDDRSetting->ulRegValue;
>
> --
> 2.0.0
>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
