[PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: fix indentation

[Bastian Stender]

On 05/22/2017 03:29 PM, Antony Pavlov wrote:
> The patch fixes this compiler's warning:
>
>     drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c: In function ‘mv64xxx_i2c_fsm’:
>     drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c:303:3: warning: this ‘if’ clause does
>     not guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
>        if (drv_data->bytes_left == 1)
>        ^~
>     drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c:305:4: note: ...this statement, but the
>     latter is misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the ‘if’
>         udelay(2);
>         ^~~~~~
>
> Signed-off-by: Antony Pavlov <antonynpavlov at gmail.com>
> Cc: Bastian Stender <bst at pengutronix.de>
> ---
>  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
> index 1a5d5ef9b..285ede84c 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
> @@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_fsm(struct mv64xxx_i2c_data *drv_data, u32 status)
>
>  		if (drv_data->bytes_left == 1)
>  			drv_data->cntl_bits &= ~REG_CONTROL_ACK;
> -			udelay(2);
> +		udelay(2);
>  		break;
>
>  	case STATUS_MAST_RD_DATA_NO_ACK: /* 0x58 */
>

Yes, the indentation happened accidentally. I just checked the 
functional spec again: the udelay is necessary regardless of 
drv_data->bytes_left.

Thanks.

Regards,
Bastian

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.
Industrial Linux Solutions
http://www.pengutronix.de/
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686