staging/rtlwifi: Fixing formatting warnings.

---
 drivers/staging/rtlwifi/core.c  | 5 +++--
 drivers/staging/rtlwifi/efuse.c | 5 +++--
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

index ca37f7511c4d..a36cb44a5388 100644
@@ -1109,7 +1109,7 @@ static void rtl_op_bss_info_changed(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
 			if (rtlpriv->dm.supp_phymode_switch) {
 				if (sta->ht_cap.ht_supported)
 					rtl_send_smps_action(hw, sta,
-							     IEEE80211_SMPS_STATIC);
+							IEEE80211_SMPS_STATIC);
 			}
 
 			if (rtlhal->current_bandtype == BAND_ON_5G) {

@@ -1882,7 +1882,8 @@ bool rtl_hal_pwrseqcmdparsing(struct rtl_priv *rtlpriv, u8 cut_version,
 				return true;
 			default:
 				WARN_ONCE(true,
-					  "rtlwifi: %s(): Unknown CMD!!\n", __func__);
+					 "rtlwifi: %s(): Unknown CMD!!\n",
+					  __func__);
 				break;
 			}
 		}

index 1dc71455f270..5b8afdb3e0fe 100644
@@ -245,7 +245,8 @@ void read_efuse(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u16 _offset, u16 _size_byte, u8 *pbuf)
 	if (!efuse_word)
 		goto out;
 	for (i = 0; i < EFUSE_MAX_WORD_UNIT; i++) {
-		efuse_word[i] = kcalloc(efuse_max_section, sizeof(u16), GFP_ATOMIC);
+		efuse_word[i] = kcalloc(efuse_max_section,
+					sizeof(u16), GFP_ATOMIC);
 		if (!efuse_word[i])
 			goto done;
 	}

@@ -375,7 +376,7 @@ bool efuse_shadow_update_chk(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
 		for (i = 0; i < 8; i = i + 2) {
 			if ((rtlefuse->efuse_map[EFUSE_INIT_MAP][base + i] !=
 			     rtlefuse->efuse_map[EFUSE_MODIFY_MAP][base + i]) ||
-			    (rtlefuse->efuse_map[EFUSE_INIT_MAP][base + i + 1] !=
+			   (rtlefuse->efuse_map[EFUSE_INIT_MAP][base + i + 1] !=
 			     rtlefuse->efuse_map[EFUSE_MODIFY_MAP][base + i +
 								   1])) {
 				words_need++;

2.17.1

Hi,

This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux kernel tree.

You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s) as indicated below:

- Your patch did many different things all at once, making it difficult to review. All Linux kernel patches need to only do one thing at a time. If you need to do multiple things (such as clean up all coding style issues in a file/driver), do it in a sequence of patches, each one doing only one thing. This will make it easier to review the patches to ensure that they are correct, and to help alleviate any merge issues that larger patches can cause.

- You did not specify a description of why the patch is needed, or possibly, any description at all, in the email body. Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what is needed in order to properly describe the change.

- You did not write a descriptive Subject: for the patch, allowing Greg, and everyone else, to know what this patch is all about. Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what a proper Subject: line should look like.

If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received from other developers.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot