@@ -705,7 +705,7 @@ static int pkcs1pad_create(struct crypto_template *tmpl, struct rtattr **tb)
CRYPTO_MAX_ALG_NAME, "pkcs1pad(%s)",
rsa_alg->base.cra_driver_name) >=
CRYPTO_MAX_ALG_NAME)
- goto out_drop_alg;
+ goto out_drop_alg;
} else {
if (snprintf(inst->alg.base.cra_name,
CRYPTO_MAX_ALG_NAME, "pkcs1pad(%s,%s)",
@@ -715,7 +715,7 @@ static int pkcs1pad_create(struct crypto_template *tmpl, struct rtattr **tb)
CRYPTO_MAX_ALG_NAME, "pkcs1pad(%s,%s)",
rsa_alg->base.cra_driver_name, hash_name) >=
CRYPTO_MAX_ALG_NAME)
- goto out_free_hash;
+ goto out_free_hash;
}
inst->alg.base.cra_flags = rsa_alg->base.cra_flags & CRYPTO_ALG_ASYNC;
These if statements aren't indented far enough and it makes static checkers complain. Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> --- Hopefully GCC6 will start complaining about these as well? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html