[PATCH v3 00/12] acpi: fix some coding style issues

[PATCH v3 00/12] acpi: fix some coding style issues

[Xiaofei Tan]

Fix some coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl.
Only cleanup and no function changes.

Differences from v2 to v3:
- Remove the modifications that may cause function change.

Differences from v1 to v2:
- Add subsystem and module name in the name of patch 05/15.
- Change to use more proper module name for some patch names.

Xiaofei Tan (12):
  ACPI: APD: fix a block comment align issue
  ACPI: processor: fix some coding style issues
  ACPI: ipmi: remove useless return statement for void function
  ACPI: LPSS: add a missed blank line after declarations
  ACPI: acpi_pad: add a missed blank line after declarations
  ACPI: battery: fix some coding style issues
  ACPI: button: fix some coding style issues
  ACPI: CPPC: fix some coding style issues
  ACPI: custom_method: fix a coding style issue
  ACPI: PM: add a missed blank line after declarations
  ACPI: sysfs: fix some coding style issues
  ACPI: dock: fix some coding style issues

 drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c       |  8 ++---
 drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c      |  1 -
 drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c      |  2 ++
 drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c       |  4 +++
 drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 18 +++--------
 drivers/acpi/battery.c        | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
 drivers/acpi/button.c         |  9 ++----
 drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c      | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 drivers/acpi/custom_method.c  |  2 +-
 drivers/acpi/device_pm.c      |  3 ++
 drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c   | 15 ++++++---
 drivers/acpi/dock.c           |  7 +++--
 12 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 97 deletions(-)

-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 01/12] ACPI: APD: fix a block comment align issue

[Xiaofei Tan]

Fix the following coding style issue reported by checkpatch.pl.
WARNING: Block comments should align the * on each line
+/**
+* Create platform device during acpi scan attach handle.

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
index 39359ce..0ec5b3f 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
@@ -176,10 +176,10 @@ static const struct apd_device_desc hip08_spi_desc = {
 
 #endif
 
-/**
-* Create platform device during acpi scan attach handle.
-* Return value > 0 on success of creating device.
-*/
+/*
+ * Create platform device during acpi scan attach handle.
+ * Return value > 0 on success of creating device.
+ */
 static int acpi_apd_create_device(struct acpi_device *adev,
 				   const struct acpi_device_id *id)
 {
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 02/12] ACPI: processor: fix some coding style issues

[Xiaofei Tan]

Fix some coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl, including
following types:

ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible
WARNING: Block comments use a trailing */ on a separate line
WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
WARNING: labels should not be indented

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 18 +++++-------------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
index fc89f3a..2d5bd2a 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
@@ -25,10 +25,7 @@
 DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct acpi_processor *, processors);
 EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL(processors);
 
-/* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-                                Errata Handling
-   -------------------------------------------------------------------------- */
-
+/* Errata Handling */
 struct acpi_processor_errata errata __read_mostly;
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(errata);
 
@@ -151,10 +148,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_errata(void)
 	return result;
 }
 
-/* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-                                Initialization
-   -------------------------------------------------------------------------- */
-
+/* Initialization */
 #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_CPU
 int __weak acpi_map_cpu(acpi_handle handle,
 		phys_cpuid_t physid, u32 acpi_id, int *pcpu)
@@ -306,6 +300,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device *device)
 	 */
 	if (invalid_logical_cpuid(pr->id) || !cpu_present(pr->id)) {
 		int ret = acpi_processor_hotadd_init(pr);
+
 		if (ret)
 			return ret;
 	}
@@ -431,10 +426,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
 }
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_CPU
-/* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-                                    Removal
-   -------------------------------------------------------------------------- */
-
+/* Removal */
 static void acpi_processor_remove(struct acpi_device *device)
 {
 	struct acpi_processor *pr;
@@ -892,7 +884,7 @@ int acpi_processor_evaluate_cst(acpi_handle handle, u32 cpu,
 
 	info->count = last_index;
 
-      end:
+end:
 	kfree(buffer.pointer);
 
 	return ret;
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 03/12] ACPI: ipmi: remove useless return statement for void function

[Xiaofei Tan]

Remove useless return statement for void function, reported by
checkpatch.pl.

WARNING: void function return statements are not generally useful
FILE: drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c:482:
+       return;
+}

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c
index 9d6c0fc..bbd00d9 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c
@@ -478,7 +478,6 @@ static void ipmi_register_bmc(int iface, struct device *dev)
 	ipmi_dev_release(ipmi_device);
 err_ref:
 	put_device(smi_data.dev);
-	return;
 }
 
 static void ipmi_bmc_gone(int iface)
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 04/12] ACPI: LPSS: add a missed blank line after declarations

[Xiaofei Tan]

Add a missed blank line after declarations, reported by checkpatch.pl.

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c
index be73974..ca742f1 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c
@@ -377,6 +377,7 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id acpi_lpss_device_ids[] = {
 static int is_memory(struct acpi_resource *res, void *not_used)
 {
 	struct resource r;
+
 	return !acpi_dev_resource_memory(res, &r);
 }
 
@@ -1200,6 +1201,7 @@ static int acpi_lpss_poweroff_noirq(struct device *dev)
 	if (pdata->dev_desc->resume_from_noirq) {
 		/* This is analogous to the acpi_lpss_suspend_noirq() case. */
 		int ret = acpi_lpss_do_poweroff_late(dev);
+
 		if (ret)
 			return ret;
 	}
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 05/12] ACPI: acpi_pad: add a missed blank line after declarations

[Xiaofei Tan]

Add a missed blank line after declarations, reported by checkpatch.pl.

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c
index b84ab72..df4adeb 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c
@@ -128,6 +128,7 @@ static void round_robin_cpu(unsigned int tsk_index)
 static void exit_round_robin(unsigned int tsk_index)
 {
 	struct cpumask *pad_busy_cpus = to_cpumask(pad_busy_cpus_bits);
+
 	cpumask_clear_cpu(tsk_in_cpu[tsk_index], pad_busy_cpus);
 	tsk_in_cpu[tsk_index] = -1;
 }
@@ -265,6 +266,7 @@ static ssize_t rrtime_store(struct device *dev,
 	struct device_attribute *attr, const char *buf, size_t count)
 {
 	unsigned long num;
+
 	if (kstrtoul(buf, 0, &num))
 		return -EINVAL;
 	if (num < 1 || num >= 100)
@@ -286,6 +288,7 @@ static ssize_t idlepct_store(struct device *dev,
 	struct device_attribute *attr, const char *buf, size_t count)
 {
 	unsigned long num;
+
 	if (kstrtoul(buf, 0, &num))
 		return -EINVAL;
 	if (num < 1 || num >= 100)
@@ -307,6 +310,7 @@ static ssize_t idlecpus_store(struct device *dev,
 	struct device_attribute *attr, const char *buf, size_t count)
 {
 	unsigned long num;
+
 	if (kstrtoul(buf, 0, &num))
 		return -EINVAL;
 	mutex_lock(&isolated_cpus_lock);
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 06/12] ACPI: battery: fix some coding style issues

[Xiaofei Tan]

Fix some coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl, including
following types:

WARNING: Block comments use * on subsequent lines
WARNING: Block comments use a trailing */ on a separate line
ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible
WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
ERROR: spaces required around that '?' (ctx:WxV)
WARNING: Block comments should align the * on each line

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/battery.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/battery.c b/drivers/acpi/battery.c
index b822f77..dae91f9 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/battery.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/battery.c
@@ -74,16 +74,17 @@ enum {
 	ACPI_BATTERY_XINFO_PRESENT,
 	ACPI_BATTERY_QUIRK_PERCENTAGE_CAPACITY,
 	/* On Lenovo Thinkpad models from 2010 and 2011, the power unit
-	   switches between mWh and mAh depending on whether the system
-	   is running on battery or not.  When mAh is the unit, most
-	   reported values are incorrect and need to be adjusted by
-	   10000/design_voltage.  Verified on x201, t410, t410s, and x220.
-	   Pre-2010 and 2012 models appear to always report in mWh and
-	   are thus unaffected (tested with t42, t61, t500, x200, x300,
-	   and x230).  Also, in mid-2012 Lenovo issued a BIOS update for
-	   the 2011 models that fixes the issue (tested on x220 with a
-	   post-1.29 BIOS), but as of Nov. 2012, no such update is
-	   available for the 2010 models.  */
+	 * switches between mWh and mAh depending on whether the system
+	 * is running on battery or not.  When mAh is the unit, most
+	 * reported values are incorrect and need to be adjusted by
+	 * 10000/design_voltage.  Verified on x201, t410, t410s, and x220.
+	 * Pre-2010 and 2012 models appear to always report in mWh and
+	 * are thus unaffected (tested with t42, t61, t500, x200, x300,
+	 * and x230).  Also, in mid-2012 Lenovo issued a BIOS update for
+	 *  the 2011 models that fixes the issue (tested on x220 with a
+	 * post-1.29 BIOS), but as of Nov. 2012, no such update is
+	 * available for the 2010 models.
+	 */
 	ACPI_BATTERY_QUIRK_THINKPAD_MAH,
 	/* for batteries reporting current capacity with design capacity
 	 * on a full charge, but showing degradation in full charge cap.
@@ -371,9 +372,7 @@ static enum power_supply_property energy_battery_full_cap_broken_props[] = {
 	POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_SERIAL_NUMBER,
 };
 
-/* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-                               Battery Management
-   -------------------------------------------------------------------------- */
+/* Battery Management */
 struct acpi_offsets {
 	size_t offset;		/* offset inside struct acpi_sbs_battery */
 	u8 mode;		/* int or string? */
@@ -431,6 +430,7 @@ static int extract_package(struct acpi_battery *battery,
 {
 	int i;
 	union acpi_object *element;
+
 	if (package->type != ACPI_TYPE_PACKAGE)
 		return -EFAULT;
 	for (i = 0; i < num; ++i) {
@@ -439,6 +439,7 @@ static int extract_package(struct acpi_battery *battery,
 		element = &package->package.elements[i];
 		if (offsets[i].mode) {
 			u8 *ptr = (u8 *)battery + offsets[i].offset;
+
 			if (element->type == ACPI_TYPE_STRING ||
 			    element->type == ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER)
 				strncpy(ptr, element->string.pointer, 32);
@@ -497,10 +498,12 @@ static int extract_battery_info(const int use_bix,
 		    battery->design_capacity_warning *
 		    10000 / battery->design_voltage;
 		/* Curiously, design_capacity_low, unlike the rest of them,
-		   is correct.  */
+		 *  is correct.
+		 */
 		/* capacity_granularity_* equal 1 on the systems tested, so
-		   it's impossible to tell if they would need an adjustment
-		   or not if their values were higher.  */
+		 * it's impossible to tell if they would need an adjustment
+		 * or not if their values were higher.
+		 */
 	}
 	if (test_bit(ACPI_BATTERY_QUIRK_DEGRADED_FULL_CHARGE, &battery->flags) &&
 	    battery->capacity_now > battery->full_charge_capacity)
@@ -532,8 +535,8 @@ static int acpi_battery_get_info(struct acpi_battery *battery)
 		if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
 			acpi_handle_info(battery->device->handle,
 					 "%s evaluation failed: %s\n",
-					 use_bix ?"_BIX":"_BIF",
-				         acpi_format_exception(status));
+					 use_bix ? "_BIX":"_BIF",
+					 acpi_format_exception(status));
 		} else {
 			result = extract_battery_info(use_bix,
 						      battery,
@@ -648,6 +651,7 @@ static ssize_t acpi_battery_alarm_show(struct device *dev,
 					char *buf)
 {
 	struct acpi_battery *battery = to_acpi_battery(dev_get_drvdata(dev));
+
 	return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", battery->alarm * 1000);
 }
 
@@ -657,6 +661,7 @@ static ssize_t acpi_battery_alarm_store(struct device *dev,
 {
 	unsigned long x;
 	struct acpi_battery *battery = to_acpi_battery(dev_get_drvdata(dev));
+
 	if (sscanf(buf, "%lu\n", &x) == 1)
 		battery->alarm = x/1000;
 	if (acpi_battery_present(battery))
@@ -743,7 +748,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(battery_hook_register);
  * This function gets called right after the battery sysfs
  * attributes have been added, so that the drivers that
  * define custom sysfs attributes can add their own.
-*/
+ */
 static void battery_hook_add_battery(struct acpi_battery *battery)
 {
 	struct acpi_battery_hook *hook_node, *tmp;
@@ -872,10 +877,12 @@ static void find_battery(const struct dmi_header *dm, void *private)
 {
 	struct acpi_battery *battery = (struct acpi_battery *)private;
 	/* Note: the hardcoded offsets below have been extracted from
-	   the source code of dmidecode.  */
+	 * the source code of dmidecode.
+	 */
 	if (dm->type == DMI_ENTRY_PORTABLE_BATTERY && dm->length >= 8) {
 		const u8 *dmi_data = (const u8 *)(dm + 1);
 		int dmi_capacity = get_unaligned((const u16 *)(dmi_data + 6));
+
 		if (dm->length >= 18)
 			dmi_capacity *= dmi_data[17];
 		if (battery->design_capacity * battery->design_voltage / 1000
@@ -917,6 +924,7 @@ static void acpi_battery_quirks(struct acpi_battery *battery)
 
 	if (battery->power_unit && dmi_name_in_vendors("LENOVO")) {
 		const char *s;
+
 		s = dmi_get_system_info(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION);
 		if (s && !strncasecmp(s, "ThinkPad", 8)) {
 			dmi_walk(find_battery, battery);
@@ -1013,10 +1021,7 @@ static void acpi_battery_refresh(struct acpi_battery *battery)
 	sysfs_add_battery(battery);
 }
 
-/* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-                                 Driver Interface
-   -------------------------------------------------------------------------- */
-
+/* Driver Interface */
 static void acpi_battery_notify(struct acpi_device *device, u32 event)
 {
 	struct acpi_battery *battery = acpi_driver_data(device);
@@ -1026,11 +1031,11 @@ static void acpi_battery_notify(struct acpi_device *device, u32 event)
 		return;
 	old = battery->bat;
 	/*
-	* On Acer Aspire V5-573G notifications are sometimes triggered too
-	* early. For example, when AC is unplugged and notification is
-	* triggered, battery state is still reported as "Full", and changes to
-	* "Discharging" only after short delay, without any notification.
-	*/
+	 * On Acer Aspire V5-573G notifications are sometimes triggered too
+	 * early. For example, when AC is unplugged and notification is
+	 * triggered, battery state is still reported as "Full", and changes to
+	 * "Discharging" only after short delay, without any notification.
+	 */
 	if (battery_notification_delay_ms > 0)
 		msleep(battery_notification_delay_ms);
 	if (event == ACPI_BATTERY_NOTIFY_INFO)
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 07/12] ACPI: button: fix some coding style issues

[Xiaofei Tan]

Fix some coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl, including
following types:

WARNING: Block comments use * on subsequent lines
WARNING: Block comments use a trailing */ on a separate line
ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/button.c | 9 ++-------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/button.c b/drivers/acpi/button.c
index 85e5e03..f25bd33 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/button.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/button.c
@@ -156,10 +156,7 @@ static unsigned long lid_report_interval __read_mostly = 500;
 module_param(lid_report_interval, ulong, 0644);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(lid_report_interval, "Interval (ms) between lid key events");
 
-/* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-                              FS Interface (/proc)
-   -------------------------------------------------------------------------- */
-
+/* FS Interface (/proc) */
 static struct proc_dir_entry *acpi_button_dir;
 static struct proc_dir_entry *acpi_lid_dir;
 
@@ -348,9 +345,7 @@ static int acpi_button_remove_fs(struct acpi_device *device)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-/* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-                                Driver Interface
-   -------------------------------------------------------------------------- */
+/* Driver Interface */
 int acpi_lid_open(void)
 {
 	if (!lid_device)
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 08/12] ACPI: CPPC: fix some coding style issues

[Xiaofei Tan]

Fix some coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl, including
following types:

WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
WARNING: unnecessary whitespace before a quoted newline
ERROR: spaces required around that '>='
ERROR: switch and case should be at the same indent

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
index ae53740..3dbaf47 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
@@ -326,6 +326,7 @@ static int send_pcc_cmd(int pcc_ss_id, u16 cmd)
 		if (unlikely(ret)) {
 			for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
 				struct cpc_desc *desc = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, i);
+
 				if (!desc)
 					continue;
 
@@ -777,7 +778,7 @@ int acpi_cppc_processor_probe(struct acpi_processor *pr)
 			cpc_ptr->cpc_regs[i-2].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER;
 			memcpy(&cpc_ptr->cpc_regs[i-2].cpc_entry.reg, gas_t, sizeof(*gas_t));
 		} else {
-			pr_debug("Err in entry:%d in CPC table of CPU:%d \n", i, pr->id);
+			pr_debug("Err in entry:%d in CPC table of CPU:%d\n", i, pr->id);
 			goto out_free;
 		}
 	}
@@ -867,7 +868,7 @@ void acpi_cppc_processor_exit(struct acpi_processor *pr)
 	void __iomem *addr;
 	int pcc_ss_id = per_cpu(cpu_pcc_subspace_idx, pr->id);
 
-	if (pcc_ss_id >=0 && pcc_data[pcc_ss_id]) {
+	if (pcc_ss_id >= 0 && pcc_data[pcc_ss_id]) {
 		if (pcc_data[pcc_ss_id]->pcc_channel_acquired) {
 			pcc_data[pcc_ss_id]->refcount--;
 			if (!pcc_data[pcc_ss_id]->refcount) {
@@ -954,22 +955,22 @@ static int cpc_read(int cpu, struct cpc_register_resource *reg_res, u64 *val)
 				val, reg->bit_width);
 
 	switch (reg->bit_width) {
-		case 8:
-			*val = readb_relaxed(vaddr);
-			break;
-		case 16:
-			*val = readw_relaxed(vaddr);
-			break;
-		case 32:
-			*val = readl_relaxed(vaddr);
-			break;
-		case 64:
-			*val = readq_relaxed(vaddr);
-			break;
-		default:
-			pr_debug("Error: Cannot read %u bit width from PCC for ss: %d\n",
-				 reg->bit_width, pcc_ss_id);
-			ret_val = -EFAULT;
+	case 8:
+		*val = readb_relaxed(vaddr);
+		break;
+	case 16:
+		*val = readw_relaxed(vaddr);
+		break;
+	case 32:
+		*val = readl_relaxed(vaddr);
+		break;
+	case 64:
+		*val = readq_relaxed(vaddr);
+		break;
+	default:
+		pr_debug("Error: Cannot read %u bit width from PCC for ss: %d\n",
+			 reg->bit_width, pcc_ss_id);
+		ret_val = -EFAULT;
 	}
 
 	return ret_val;
@@ -993,23 +994,23 @@ static int cpc_write(int cpu, struct cpc_register_resource *reg_res, u64 val)
 				val, reg->bit_width);
 
 	switch (reg->bit_width) {
-		case 8:
-			writeb_relaxed(val, vaddr);
-			break;
-		case 16:
-			writew_relaxed(val, vaddr);
-			break;
-		case 32:
-			writel_relaxed(val, vaddr);
-			break;
-		case 64:
-			writeq_relaxed(val, vaddr);
-			break;
-		default:
-			pr_debug("Error: Cannot write %u bit width to PCC for ss: %d\n",
-				 reg->bit_width, pcc_ss_id);
-			ret_val = -EFAULT;
-			break;
+	case 8:
+		writeb_relaxed(val, vaddr);
+		break;
+	case 16:
+		writew_relaxed(val, vaddr);
+		break;
+	case 32:
+		writel_relaxed(val, vaddr);
+		break;
+	case 64:
+		writeq_relaxed(val, vaddr);
+		break;
+	default:
+		pr_debug("Error: Cannot write %u bit width to PCC for ss: %d\n",
+			 reg->bit_width, pcc_ss_id);
+		ret_val = -EFAULT;
+		break;
 	}
 
 	return ret_val;
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 09/12] ACPI: custom_method: fix a coding style issue

[Xiaofei Tan]

Fix the following coding style issue reported by checkpatch.pl

ERROR: "foo * bar" should be "foo *bar"
FILE: drivers/acpi/custom_method.c:22:
+static ssize_t cm_write(struct file *file, const char __user * user_buf,

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/custom_method.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/custom_method.c b/drivers/acpi/custom_method.c
index 7b54dc9..443fdf62 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/custom_method.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/custom_method.c
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ static struct dentry *cm_dentry;
 
 /* /sys/kernel/debug/acpi/custom_method */
 
-static ssize_t cm_write(struct file *file, const char __user * user_buf,
+static ssize_t cm_write(struct file *file, const char __user *user_buf,
 			size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
 {
 	static char *buf;
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 10/12] ACPI: PM: add a missed blank line after declarations

[Xiaofei Tan]

Add a missed blank line after declarations, reported by checkpatch.pl.

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/device_pm.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
index 0961537..16c0fe8 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
@@ -966,6 +966,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_resume);
 int acpi_subsys_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
 {
 	int ret = pm_generic_runtime_suspend(dev);
+
 	return ret ? ret : acpi_dev_suspend(dev, true);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_subsys_runtime_suspend);
@@ -980,6 +981,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_subsys_runtime_suspend);
 int acpi_subsys_runtime_resume(struct device *dev)
 {
 	int ret = acpi_dev_resume(dev);
+
 	return ret ? ret : pm_generic_runtime_resume(dev);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_subsys_runtime_resume);
@@ -1171,6 +1173,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_subsys_freeze);
 int acpi_subsys_restore_early(struct device *dev)
 {
 	int ret = acpi_dev_resume(dev);
+
 	return ret ? ret : pm_generic_restore_early(dev);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_subsys_restore_early);
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 11/12] ACPI: sysfs: fix some coding style issues

[Xiaofei Tan]

Fix some coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl, including
following types:

WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
WARNING: Block comments should align the * on each line
ERROR: open brace '{' following function definitions go on the next line

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c b/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c
index da4ff2a..a07d4ad 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c
@@ -73,6 +73,7 @@ static const struct sysfs_ops acpi_data_node_sysfs_ops = {
 static void acpi_data_node_release(struct kobject *kobj)
 {
 	struct acpi_data_node *dn = to_data_node(kobj);
+
 	complete(&dn->kobj_done);
 }
 
@@ -130,7 +131,7 @@ static void acpi_hide_nondev_subnodes(struct acpi_device_data *data)
  * Return: 0: no _HID and no _CID
  *         -EINVAL: output error
  *         -ENOMEM: output is truncated
-*/
+ */
 static int create_pnp_modalias(struct acpi_device *acpi_dev, char *modalias,
 			       int size)
 {
@@ -431,7 +432,8 @@ static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(path);
 /* sysfs file that shows description text from the ACPI _STR method */
 static ssize_t description_show(struct device *dev,
 				struct device_attribute *attr,
-				char *buf) {
+				char *buf)
+{
 	struct acpi_device *acpi_dev = to_acpi_device(dev);
 	int result;
 
@@ -456,7 +458,8 @@ static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(description);
 
 static ssize_t
 sun_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
-	 char *buf) {
+	 char *buf)
+{
 	struct acpi_device *acpi_dev = to_acpi_device(dev);
 	acpi_status status;
 	unsigned long long sun;
@@ -471,7 +474,8 @@ static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(sun);
 
 static ssize_t
 hrv_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
-	 char *buf) {
+	 char *buf)
+{
 	struct acpi_device *acpi_dev = to_acpi_device(dev);
 	acpi_status status;
 	unsigned long long hrv;
@@ -485,7 +489,8 @@ hrv_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
 static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(hrv);
 
 static ssize_t status_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
-				char *buf) {
+				char *buf)
+{
 	struct acpi_device *acpi_dev = to_acpi_device(dev);
 	acpi_status status;
 	unsigned long long sta;
-- 
2.8.1

[PATCH v3 12/12] ACPI: dock: fix some coding style issues

[Xiaofei Tan]

Fix some coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl, including
following types:

WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
ERROR: spaces required around that ':'
WARNING: Statements should start on a tabstop

Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/dock.c | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/dock.c b/drivers/acpi/dock.c
index 0937cea..7cf9215 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/dock.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/dock.c
@@ -271,6 +271,7 @@ static void hotplug_dock_devices(struct dock_station *ds, u32 event)
 
 		if (!acpi_device_enumerated(adev)) {
 			int ret = acpi_bus_scan(adev->handle);
+
 			if (ret)
 				dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "scan error %d\n", -ret);
 		}
@@ -502,6 +503,7 @@ static ssize_t flags_show(struct device *dev,
 			  struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf)
 {
 	struct dock_station *dock_station = dev->platform_data;
+
 	return snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%d\n", dock_station->flags);
 
 }
@@ -523,7 +525,7 @@ static ssize_t undock_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
 	begin_undock(dock_station);
 	ret = handle_eject_request(dock_station, ACPI_NOTIFY_EJECT_REQUEST);
 	acpi_scan_lock_release();
-	return ret ? ret: count;
+	return ret ? ret : count;
 }
 static DEVICE_ATTR_WO(undock);
 
@@ -535,10 +537,11 @@ static ssize_t uid_show(struct device *dev,
 {
 	unsigned long long lbuf;
 	struct dock_station *dock_station = dev->platform_data;
+
 	acpi_status status = acpi_evaluate_integer(dock_station->handle,
 					"_UID", NULL, &lbuf);
 	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
-	    return 0;
+		return 0;
 
 	return snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%llx\n", lbuf);
 }
-- 
2.8.1

Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] acpi: fix some coding style issues

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 1:11 PM Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> Fix some coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl.
> Only cleanup and no function changes.
>
> Differences from v2 to v3:
> - Remove the modifications that may cause function change.
>
> Differences from v1 to v2:
> - Add subsystem and module name in the name of patch 05/15.
> - Change to use more proper module name for some patch names.
>
> Xiaofei Tan (12):
>   ACPI: APD: fix a block comment align issue
>   ACPI: processor: fix some coding style issues
>   ACPI: ipmi: remove useless return statement for void function
>   ACPI: LPSS: add a missed blank line after declarations
>   ACPI: acpi_pad: add a missed blank line after declarations
>   ACPI: battery: fix some coding style issues
>   ACPI: button: fix some coding style issues
>   ACPI: CPPC: fix some coding style issues
>   ACPI: custom_method: fix a coding style issue
>   ACPI: PM: add a missed blank line after declarations
>   ACPI: sysfs: fix some coding style issues
>   ACPI: dock: fix some coding style issues
>
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c       |  8 ++---
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c      |  1 -
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c      |  2 ++
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c       |  4 +++
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 18 +++--------
>  drivers/acpi/battery.c        | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>  drivers/acpi/button.c         |  9 ++----
>  drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c      | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>  drivers/acpi/custom_method.c  |  2 +-
>  drivers/acpi/device_pm.c      |  3 ++
>  drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c   | 15 ++++++---
>  drivers/acpi/dock.c           |  7 +++--
>  12 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 97 deletions(-)
>
> --

Can you please stop sending new versions of this for a while?

You've sent three of them over the last weekend and honestly I haven't
had a chance to look at the first one even.

Re: [Linuxarm] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] acpi: fix some coding style issues

[Xiaofei Tan]

Hi Rafael,

On 2021/3/29 20:50, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 1:11 PM Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com> wrote:
>>
>> Fix some coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl.
>> Only cleanup and no function changes.
>>
>> Differences from v2 to v3:
>> - Remove the modifications that may cause function change.
>>
>> Differences from v1 to v2:
>> - Add subsystem and module name in the name of patch 05/15.
>> - Change to use more proper module name for some patch names.
>>
>> Xiaofei Tan (12):
>>   ACPI: APD: fix a block comment align issue
>>   ACPI: processor: fix some coding style issues
>>   ACPI: ipmi: remove useless return statement for void function
>>   ACPI: LPSS: add a missed blank line after declarations
>>   ACPI: acpi_pad: add a missed blank line after declarations
>>   ACPI: battery: fix some coding style issues
>>   ACPI: button: fix some coding style issues
>>   ACPI: CPPC: fix some coding style issues
>>   ACPI: custom_method: fix a coding style issue
>>   ACPI: PM: add a missed blank line after declarations
>>   ACPI: sysfs: fix some coding style issues
>>   ACPI: dock: fix some coding style issues
>>
>>  drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c       |  8 ++---
>>  drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c      |  1 -
>>  drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c      |  2 ++
>>  drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c       |  4 +++
>>  drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 18 +++--------
>>  drivers/acpi/battery.c        | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>>  drivers/acpi/button.c         |  9 ++----
>>  drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c      | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>>  drivers/acpi/custom_method.c  |  2 +-
>>  drivers/acpi/device_pm.c      |  3 ++
>>  drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c   | 15 ++++++---
>>  drivers/acpi/dock.c           |  7 +++--
>>  12 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 97 deletions(-)
>>
>> --
>
> Can you please stop sending new versions of this for a while?
>

OK.


> You've sent three of them over the last weekend and honestly I haven't
> had a chance to look at the first one even.


I tried to fix a low-level mistake as quickly as possible. I'm sorry for 
that



> _______________________________________________
> Linuxarm mailing list -- linuxarm@openeuler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to linuxarm-leave@openeuler.org
>

Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] acpi: fix some coding style issues

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 1:11 PM Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> Fix some coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl.
> Only cleanup and no function changes.
>
> Differences from v2 to v3:
> - Remove the modifications that may cause function change.
>
> Differences from v1 to v2:
> - Add subsystem and module name in the name of patch 05/15.
> - Change to use more proper module name for some patch names.
>
> Xiaofei Tan (12):
>   ACPI: APD: fix a block comment align issue
>   ACPI: processor: fix some coding style issues
>   ACPI: ipmi: remove useless return statement for void function
>   ACPI: LPSS: add a missed blank line after declarations
>   ACPI: acpi_pad: add a missed blank line after declarations
>   ACPI: battery: fix some coding style issues
>   ACPI: button: fix some coding style issues
>   ACPI: CPPC: fix some coding style issues
>   ACPI: custom_method: fix a coding style issue
>   ACPI: PM: add a missed blank line after declarations
>   ACPI: sysfs: fix some coding style issues
>   ACPI: dock: fix some coding style issues

All applied as 5.13 material, thanks!