Re: [PATCH] x86/hyperv: Cosmetic changes for hv_apic.c

Saurabh Singh Sengar
2024-03-21T09:57:09Z

On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 01:22:05AM -0700, Erni Sri Satya Vennela wrote:
> Fix issues reported by checkpatch.pl script for hv_apic.c file
> - Alignment should match open parenthesis
> - Remove unnecessary parenthesis
>
> No functional changes intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Erni Sri Satya Vennela <ernis@linux.microsoft.com>
> ---
> I'm resending this patch because I have missed some email aliases in my
> previous mail.
>
> arch/x86/hyperv/hv_apic.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/hyperv/hv_apic.c b/arch/x86/hyperv/hv_apic.c
> index 5fc45543e955..0569f579338b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/hyperv/hv_apic.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/hyperv/hv_apic.c
> @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ static bool cpu_is_self(int cpu)
> * IPI implementation on Hyper-V.
> */
> static bool __send_ipi_mask_ex(const struct cpumask *mask, int vector,
> - bool exclude_self)
> + bool exclude_self)
> {
> struct hv_send_ipi_ex *ipi_arg;
> unsigned long flags;
> @@ -132,8 +132,8 @@ static bool __send_ipi_mask_ex(const struct cpumask *mask, int vector,
> if (!cpumask_equal(mask, cpu_present_mask) || exclude_self) {
> ipi_arg->vp_set.format = HV_GENERIC_SET_SPARSE_4K;
>
> - nr_bank = cpumask_to_vpset_skip(&(ipi_arg->vp_set), mask,
> - exclude_self ? cpu_is_self : NULL);
> + nr_bank = cpumask_to_vpset_skip(&ipi_arg->vp_set, mask,
> + exclude_self ? cpu_is_self : NULL);
>
> /*
> * 'nr_bank <= 0' means some CPUs in cpumask can't be
> @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ static bool __send_ipi_mask_ex(const struct cpumask *mask, int vector,
> }
>
> status = hv_do_rep_hypercall(HVCALL_SEND_IPI_EX, 0, nr_bank,
> - ipi_arg, NULL);
> + ipi_arg, NULL);
>
> ipi_mask_ex_done:
> local_irq_restore(flags);
> @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ static bool __send_ipi_mask_ex(const struct cpumask *mask, int vector,
> }
>
> static bool __send_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask, int vector,
> - bool exclude_self)
> + bool exclude_self)
> {
> int cur_cpu, vcpu, this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> struct hv_send_ipi ipi_arg;
> @@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ static bool __send_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask, int vector,
> return false;
> }
>
> - if ((vector < HV_IPI_LOW_VECTOR) || (vector > HV_IPI_HIGH_VECTOR))
> + if (vector < HV_IPI_LOW_VECTOR || vector > HV_IPI_HIGH_VECTOR)
> return false;
>
> /*
> @@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ static bool __send_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask, int vector,
> }
>
> status = hv_do_fast_hypercall16(HVCALL_SEND_IPI, ipi_arg.vector,
> - ipi_arg.cpu_mask);
> + ipi_arg.cpu_mask);
> return hv_result_success(status);
>
> do_ex_hypercall:
> @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ static bool __send_ipi_one(int cpu, int vector)
> return false;
> }
>
> - if ((vector < HV_IPI_LOW_VECTOR) || (vector > HV_IPI_HIGH_VECTOR))
> + if (vector < HV_IPI_LOW_VECTOR || vector > HV_IPI_HIGH_VECTOR)
> return false;
>
> if (vp >= 64)
> --
> 2.34.1
>

Thanks for cleaning it up,
Reviewed-by: Saurabh Sengar <ssengar@linux.microsoft.com>