[PATCH bpf-next v5 1/9] bpf: Drop duplicate blank lines in verifier

[Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>]

There are many adjacent blank lines in the verifier that have accumulated
over time.

Drop them for cleanup.

No functional changes intended.

Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 15 ---------------
 1 file changed, 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index ed7ba0e6a9ce..2690d063a240 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -651,7 +651,6 @@ static void __mark_dynptr_reg(struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
 			      enum bpf_dynptr_type type,
 			      bool first_slot, int id, int parent_id);
 
-
 static void mark_dynptr_stack_regs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 				   struct bpf_reg_state *sreg1,
 				   struct bpf_reg_state *sreg2,
@@ -1688,7 +1687,6 @@ static bool same_callsites(struct bpf_verifier_state *a, struct bpf_verifier_sta
 	return true;
 }
 
-
 void bpf_free_backedges(struct bpf_scc_visit *visit)
 {
 	struct bpf_scc_backedge *backedge, *next;
@@ -2308,7 +2306,6 @@ static struct bpf_verifier_state *push_async_cb(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 	return &elem->st;
 }
 
-
 static int cmp_subprogs(const void *a, const void *b)
 {
 	return ((struct bpf_subprog_info *)a)->start -
@@ -3325,7 +3322,6 @@ static bool is_spillable_regtype(enum bpf_reg_type type)
 	}
 }
 
-
 /* check if register is a constant scalar value */
 static bool is_reg_const(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, bool subreg32)
 {
@@ -3987,7 +3983,6 @@ static int check_stack_read(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 	return err;
 }
 
-
 /* check_stack_write dispatches to check_stack_write_fixed_off or
  * check_stack_write_var_off.
  *
@@ -4782,7 +4777,6 @@ static int check_sock_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx,
 		valid = false;
 	}
 
-
 	if (valid) {
 		env->insn_aux_data[insn_idx].ctx_field_size =
 			info.ctx_field_size;
@@ -6602,7 +6596,6 @@ static int check_stack_range_initialized(
 	if (err)
 		return err;
 
-
 	if (tnum_is_const(reg->var_off)) {
 		min_off = max_off = reg->var_off.value + off;
 	} else {
@@ -7316,7 +7309,6 @@ static bool is_iter_new_kfunc(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
 	return meta->kfunc_flags & KF_ITER_NEW;
 }
 
-
 static bool is_iter_destroy_kfunc(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
 {
 	return meta->kfunc_flags & KF_ITER_DESTROY;
@@ -11459,7 +11451,6 @@ static int process_irq_flag(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state *
 	return 0;
 }
 
-
 static int ref_set_non_owning(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
 {
 	struct btf_record *rec = reg_btf_record(reg);
@@ -16335,7 +16326,6 @@ static int check_ld_abs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-
 static bool return_retval_range(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_retval_range *range)
 {
 	enum bpf_prog_type prog_type = resolve_prog_type(env->prog);
@@ -18228,8 +18218,6 @@ static void release_insn_arrays(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 		bpf_insn_array_release(env->insn_array_maps[i]);
 }
 
-
-
 /* The verifier does more data flow analysis than llvm and will not
  * explore branches that are dead at run time. Malicious programs can
  * have dead code too. Therefore replace all dead at-run-time code
@@ -18257,8 +18245,6 @@ static void sanitize_dead_code(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 	}
 }
 
-
-
 static void free_states(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 {
 	struct bpf_verifier_state_list *sl;
@@ -18540,7 +18526,6 @@ static int do_check_main(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 	return ret;
 }
 
-
 static void print_verification_stats(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 {
 	/* Skip over hidden subprogs which are not verified. */
-- 
2.54.0