Obviously in the current place the 'else' keyword is redundant, though it seems quite correct when we check if nval is in allowed range.
Reattach the condition branch there. Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> --- drivers/acpi/property.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/acpi/property.c b/drivers/acpi/property.c index 7836e2e..a28752c 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/property.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/property.c @@ -528,13 +528,14 @@ int acpi_dev_prop_read(struct acpi_device *adev, const char *propname, if (!val) return obj->package.count; - else if (nval <= 0) - return -EINVAL; if (nval > obj->package.count) return -EOVERFLOW; + else if (nval <= 0) + return -EINVAL; items = obj->package.elements; + switch (proptype) { case DEV_PROP_U8: ret = acpi_copy_property_array_u8(items, (u8 *)val, nval); @@ -552,8 +553,7 @@ int acpi_dev_prop_read(struct acpi_device *adev, const char *propname, ret = acpi_copy_property_array_string(items, (char **)val, nval); break; default: - ret = -EINVAL; - break; + return -EINVAL; } return ret; } -- 2.5.0 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
