Re: [PATCH] drm/omap: fix misleading indentation in pixinc()

2021-03-26 Thread Tomi Valkeinen 

On 22/03/2021 18:41, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

From: Arnd Bergmann 

An old patch added a 'return' statement after each BUG() in this driver,
which was necessary at the time, but has become redundant after the BUG()
definition was updated to handle this properly.

gcc-11 now warns about one such instance, where the 'return' statement
was incorrectly indented:

drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c: In function ‘pixinc’:
drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c:2093:9: error: this ‘else’ clause does not 
guard... [-Werror=misleading-indentation]
  2093 | else
   | ^~~~
drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c:2095:17: note: ...this statement, but the 
latter is misleadingly indented as if it were guarded by the ‘else’
  2095 | return 0;
   | ^~

Address this by removing the return again and changing the BUG()
to be unconditional to make this more intuitive.

Fixes: c6eee968d40d ("OMAPDSS: remove compiler warnings when CONFIG_BUG=n")
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann 
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c | 5 ++---
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c
index f4cbef8ccace..5619420cc2cc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c
@@ -2090,9 +2090,8 @@ static s32 pixinc(int pixels, u8 ps)
return 1 + (pixels - 1) * ps;
else if (pixels < 0)
return 1 - (-pixels + 1) * ps;
-   else
-   BUG();
-   return 0;
+
+   BUG();
  }
  
  static void calc_offset(u16 screen_width, u16 width,


Thanks, I'll pick this up.

 Tomi
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH] drm/omap: fix misleading indentation in pixinc()

2021-03-22 Thread Arnd Bergmann 
From: Arnd Bergmann 

An old patch added a 'return' statement after each BUG() in this driver,
which was necessary at the time, but has become redundant after the BUG()
definition was updated to handle this properly.

gcc-11 now warns about one such instance, where the 'return' statement
was incorrectly indented:

drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c: In function ‘pixinc’:
drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c:2093:9: error: this ‘else’ clause does not 
guard... [-Werror=misleading-indentation]
 2093 | else
  | ^~~~
drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c:2095:17: note: ...this statement, but the 
latter is misleadingly indented as if it were guarded by the ‘else’
 2095 | return 0;
  | ^~

Address this by removing the return again and changing the BUG()
to be unconditional to make this more intuitive.

Fixes: c6eee968d40d ("OMAPDSS: remove compiler warnings when CONFIG_BUG=n")
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann 
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c | 5 ++---
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c
index f4cbef8ccace..5619420cc2cc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c
@@ -2090,9 +2090,8 @@ static s32 pixinc(int pixels, u8 ps)
return 1 + (pixels - 1) * ps;
else if (pixels < 0)
return 1 - (-pixels + 1) * ps;
-   else
-   BUG();
-   return 0;
+
+   BUG();
 }
 
 static void calc_offset(u16 screen_width, u16 width,
-- 
2.29.2

___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel