@@ -329,7 +329,7 @@ static void uc_handle_exit_ucontrol(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) *self)
* * fail on codes not expected in the test cases
* Returns if interception is handled / execution can be continued
*/
-static bool uc_handle_sieic(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) * self)
+static bool uc_handle_sieic(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) *self)
{
struct kvm_s390_sie_block *sie_block = self->sie_block;
struct kvm_run *run = self->run;
@@ -358,7 +358,7 @@ static bool uc_handle_sieic(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) * self)
}
/* verify VM state on exit */
-static bool uc_handle_exit(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) * self)
+static bool uc_handle_exit(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) *self)
{
struct kvm_run *run = self->run;
@@ -378,7 +378,7 @@ static bool uc_handle_exit(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) * self)
}
/* run the VM until interrupted */
-static int uc_run_once(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) * self)
+static int uc_run_once(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) *self)
{
int rc;
@@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ static int uc_run_once(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) * self)
return rc;
}
-static void uc_assert_diag44(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) * self)
+static void uc_assert_diag44(FIXTURE_DATA(uc_kvm) *self)
{
struct kvm_s390_sie_block *sie_block = self->sie_block;
Checkpatch thinks that we're doing a multiplication but we're obviously not. Fix 4 instances where we adhered to wrong checkpatch advice. Signed-off-by: Christoph Schlameuss <schlameuss@linux.ibm.com> --- tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/ucontrol_test.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)