media: adv7180: Fix cppcheck warnings and errors

  WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
ERROR: else should follow close brace '}'

Signed-off-by: Bhavin Sharma <bhavin.sharma@siliconsignals.io>
  

Quoting Bhavin Sharma (2023-12-27 13:35:16)
> WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
> ERROR: else should follow close brace '}'
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bhavin Sharma <bhavin.sharma@siliconsignals.io>
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c b/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
> index 54134473186b..91756116eff7 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
> @@ -357,6 +357,7 @@ static int adv7180_querystd(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, v4l2_std_id *std)
>  {
>         struct adv7180_state *state = to_state(sd);

Personally, I would keep the if (err) hugging the line it's associated
with.


>         int err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&state->mutex);
> +
>         if (err)
>                 return err;
>  
> @@ -411,6 +412,7 @@ static int adv7180_g_input_status(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u32 *status)
>  {
>         struct adv7180_state *state = to_state(sd);
>         int ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&state->mutex);
> +
>         if (ret)
>                 return ret;
>  
> @@ -1046,8 +1048,7 @@ static int adv7182_init(struct adv7180_state *state)
>                                               ADV7180_REG_EXTENDED_OUTPUT_CONTROL,
>                                               0x17);
>                         }
> -               }
> -               else
> +               } else

I think kernel code style requires an else clause following a multiline
scope to also have its scope enclosed in braces even if it's a single
statement.

--
Kieran

>                         adv7180_write(state,
>                                       ADV7180_REG_EXTENDED_OUTPUT_CONTROL,
>                                       0x07);
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>
  

Thanks for the reply, Kieran

>> WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
>> ERROR: else should follow close brace '}'
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Bhavin Sharma <bhavin.sharma@siliconsignals.io>
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c b/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
>> index 54134473186b..91756116eff7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
>> @@ -357,6 +357,7 @@ static int adv7180_querystd(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, v4l2_std_id *std)
>>  {
>>         struct adv7180_state *state = to_state(sd);

>>Personally, I would keep the if (err) hugging the line it's associated
with.

If we follow the code base pattern for this diver, we are getting same online space in conditional if statements.
So, we need to make changes there also.

>>         int err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&state->mutex);
>> +
>>         if (err)
>>                 return err;
>>  
>> @@ -411,6 +412,7 @@ static int adv7180_g_input_status(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u32 *status)
>>  {
>>         struct adv7180_state *state = to_state(sd);
>>         int ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&state->mutex);
>> +
>>         if (ret)
>>                 return ret;
>>  
>> @@ -1046,8 +1048,7 @@ static int adv7182_init(struct adv7180_state *state)
>>                                               ADV7180_REG_EXTENDED_OUTPUT_CONTROL,
>>                                               0x17);
>>                         }
>> -               }
>> -               else
>> +               } else

>>I think kernel code style requires an else clause following a multiline
scope to also have its scope enclosed in braces even if it's a single
statement.

On many places in driver there is single statement after else without closing 
So, we have to make changes in those places also.

So, better I should make changes in all places and make version V2 patch.

Please give your suggestions.

--
Bhavin Sharma

>>                         adv7180_write(state,
>>                                       ADV7180_REG_EXTENDED_OUTPUT_CONTROL,
>>                                       0x07);
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
>>
  

Quoting Bhavin Sharma (2023-12-29 13:37:14)
> Thanks for the reply,�Kieran
> 
> >> WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
> >> ERROR: else should follow close brace '}'
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Bhavin Sharma <bhavin.sharma@siliconsignals.io>
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c b/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
> >> index 54134473186b..91756116eff7 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
> >> @@ -357,6 +357,7 @@ static int adv7180_querystd(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, v4l2_std_id *std)
> >>� {
> >>�������� struct adv7180_state *state = to_state(sd);
> 
> >>Personally, I would keep the if (err) hugging the line it's associated
> with.
> 
> If we follow the code base pattern for this diver, we are getting same online space in conditional if statements.
> So, we need to make changes there also.

If there are multiple places in a file for the same fixup, then indeed -
make them all in a single patch as a single cleanup.


> >>�������� int err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&state->mutex);
> >> +
> >>�������� if (err)
> >>���������������� return err;
> >>� 
> >> @@ -411,6 +412,7 @@ static int adv7180_g_input_status(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u32 *status)
> >>� {
> >>�������� struct adv7180_state *state = to_state(sd);
> >>�������� int ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&state->mutex);
> >> +
> >>�������� if (ret)
> >>���������������� return ret;
> >>� 
> >> @@ -1046,8 +1048,7 @@ static int adv7182_init(struct adv7180_state *state)
> >>���������������������������������������������� ADV7180_REG_EXTENDED_OUTPUT_CONTROL,
> >>���������������������������������������������� 0x17);
> >>������������������������ }
> >> -�������������� }
> >> -�������������� else
> >> +�������������� } else
> 
> >>I think kernel code style requires an else clause following a multiline
> scope to also have its scope enclosed in braces even if it's a single
> statement.
> 
> On many places in driver there is single statement after else without closing�
> So, we have to make changes in those places also.
> 
> So, better I should make changes in all places and make version V2 patch.

Yes, but you should probably tackle both cleanups as two patches
covering the whole file for each cleanup.

--
Kieran


> 
> Please give your suggestions.
> 
> --
> Bhavin Sharma
> 
> >>������������������������ adv7180_write(state,
> >>�������������������������������������� ADV7180_REG_EXTENDED_OUTPUT_CONTROL,
> >>�������������������������������������� 0x07);
> >> -- 
> >> 2.25.1
> >>
  

Hi,

> Quoting Bhavin Sharma (2023-12-29 13:37:14)
>> Thanks for the reply,�Kieran
>>
>> >> WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
>> >> ERROR: else should follow close brace '}'
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Bhavin Sharma <bhavin.sharma@siliconsignals.io>
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c b/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
>> >> index 54134473186b..91756116eff7 100644
>> >> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
>> >> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
>> >> @@ -357,6 +357,7 @@ static int adv7180_querystd(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, v4l2_std_id *std)
>> >>� {
>> >>�������� struct adv7180_state *state = to_state(sd);
>>
>> >>Personally, I would keep the if (err) hugging the line it's associated
>> with.
>>
>> If we follow the code base pattern for this diver, we are getting same online space in conditional if statements.
>> So, we need to make changes there also.

> If there are multiple places in a file for the same fixup, then indeed -
> make them all in a single patch as a single cleanup.


>> >>�������� int err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&state->mutex);
>> >> +
>> >>�������� if (err)
>> >>���������������� return err;
>> >>�
>> >> @@ -411,6 +412,7 @@ static int adv7180_g_input_status(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u32 *status)
>> >>� {
>> >>�������� struct adv7180_state *state = to_state(sd);
>> >>�������� int ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&state->mutex);
>> >> +
>> >>�������� if (ret)
>> >>���������������� return ret;
>> >>�
>> >> @@ -1046,8 +1048,7 @@ static int adv7182_init(struct adv7180_state *state)
>> >>���������������������������������������������� ADV7180_REG_EXTENDED_OUTPUT_CONTROL,
>> >>���������������������������������������������� 0x17);
>> >>������������������������ }
>> >> -�������������� }
>> >> -�������������� else
>> >> +�������������� } else
>>
>> >>I think kernel code style requires an else clause following a multiline
>> scope to also have its scope enclosed in braces even if it's a single
>> statement.
>>
>> On many places in driver there is single statement after else without closing�
>> So, we have to make changes in those places also.
>>
>> So, better I should make changes in all places and make version V2 patch.

> Yes, but you should probably tackle both cleanups as two patches
> covering the whole file for each cleanup.

I have submitted two different patches each for separate cleanups. 

Any update on those patches?

Thank you,
Bhavin Sharma