This is harmless because we do the same thing either way but, from the indenting, then it seems like lpfc_destroy_vport_work_array() was meant to be inside the if statement. Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> --- The static checker complains about some of the other indents as well. drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c:708 lpfc_hba_init_link_fc_topology() warn: bad indenting. drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c:1978 lpfc_parse_vpd() warn: bad indenting. drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c:8116 lpfc_sli4_pci_mem_setup() warn: bad indenting. diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c index 0b2c53a..f8fd364 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c @@ -2822,7 +2822,7 @@ lpfc_online(struct lpfc_hba *phba) } vports = lpfc_create_vport_work_array(phba); - if (vports != NULL) + if (vports != NULL) { for (i = 0; i <= phba->max_vports && vports[i] != NULL; i++) { struct Scsi_Host *shost; shost = lpfc_shost_from_vport(vports[i]); @@ -2840,6 +2840,7 @@ lpfc_online(struct lpfc_hba *phba) spin_unlock_irq(shost->host_lock); } lpfc_destroy_vport_work_array(phba, vports); + } lpfc_unblock_mgmt_io(phba); return 0; -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html