From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> The indentation level in acpi_ec_submit_event() can be reduced, so do that and while at it fix a typo in the comment affected by that change. No intentional functional impact. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/acpi/ec.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/ec.c =================================================================== --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/ec.c +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/ec.c @@ -451,24 +451,25 @@ static void acpi_ec_submit_event(struct if (!acpi_ec_event_enabled(ec)) return; - if (ec->event_state == EC_EVENT_READY) { - ec_dbg_evt("Command(%s) submitted/blocked", - acpi_ec_cmd_string(ACPI_EC_COMMAND_QUERY)); + if (ec->event_state != EC_EVENT_READY) + return; + + ec_dbg_evt("Command(%s) submitted/blocked", + acpi_ec_cmd_string(ACPI_EC_COMMAND_QUERY)); - ec->event_state = EC_EVENT_IN_PROGRESS; - /* - * If events_to_process is greqter than 0 at this point, the - * while () loop in acpi_ec_event_handler() is still running - * and incrementing events_to_process will cause it to invoke - * acpi_ec_submit_query() once more, so it is not necessary to - * queue up the event work to start the same loop again. - */ - if (ec->events_to_process++ > 0) - return; + ec->event_state = EC_EVENT_IN_PROGRESS; + /* + * If events_to_process is greater than 0 at this point, the while () + * loop in acpi_ec_event_handler() is still running and incrementing + * events_to_process will cause it to invoke acpi_ec_submit_query() once + * more, so it is not necessary to queue up the event work to start the + * same loop again. + */ + if (ec->events_to_process++ > 0) + return; - ec->events_in_progress++; - queue_work(ec_wq, &ec->work); - } + ec->events_in_progress++; + queue_work(ec_wq, &ec->work); } static void acpi_ec_complete_event(struct acpi_ec *ec)