[Intel-gfx] [patch] drm/i915: cleanup some indenting

[Dan Carpenter]

Static checkers complain that we should probably add curly braces
because, from the indenting, it looks like seq_printf() should be inside
the list_for_each_entry() loop.  But the code is actually correct, it's
just the indenting which is off.

Besides fixing the indenting on seq_printf(), I did add curly braces,
because generally mult-line indents should have curly braces to make
them more readable.

Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter at oracle.com>

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
index 26e9c7b..a76b2ed 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
@@ -139,10 +139,11 @@ describe_obj(struct seq_file *m, struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
 		   obj->madv == I915_MADV_DONTNEED ? " purgeable" : "");
 	if (obj->base.name)
 		seq_printf(m, " (name: %d)", obj->base.name);
-	list_for_each_entry(vma, &obj->vma_list, vma_link)
+	list_for_each_entry(vma, &obj->vma_list, vma_link) {
 		if (vma->pin_count > 0)
 			pin_count++;
-		seq_printf(m, " (pinned x %d)", pin_count);
+	}
+	seq_printf(m, " (pinned x %d)", pin_count);
 	if (obj->pin_display)
 		seq_printf(m, " (display)");
 	if (obj->fence_reg != I915_FENCE_REG_NONE)