ACPI: x86: s2idle: Post-increment variables when getting constraints

[ Upstream commit 3c6b121 ]

When code uses a pre-increment it makes the reader question "why".
In the constraint fetching code there is no reason for the variables
to be pre-incremented so adjust to post-increment.
No intended functional changes.

Reviewed-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
Suggested-by: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Stable-dep-of: 9cc8cd0 ("ACPI: x86: s2idle: Fix a logic error parsing AMD constraints table")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c

@@ -122,13 +122,13 @@ static void lpi_device_get_constraints_amd(void)
 			acpi_handle_debug(lps0_device_handle,
 					  "LPI: constraints list begin:\n");
 
-			for (j = 0; j < package->package.count; ++j) {
+			for (j = 0; j < package->package.count; j++) {
 				union acpi_object *info_obj = &package->package.elements[j];
 				struct lpi_device_constraint_amd dev_info = {};
 				struct lpi_constraints *list;
 				acpi_status status;
 
-				for (k = 0; k < info_obj->package.count; ++k) {
+				for (k = 0; k < info_obj->package.count; k++) {
 					union acpi_object *obj = &info_obj->package.elements[k];
 
 					list = &lpi_constraints_table[lpi_constraints_table_size];
@@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ static void lpi_device_get_constraints(void)
 		if (!package)
 			continue;
 
-		for (j = 0; j < package->package.count; ++j) {
+		for (j = 0; j < package->package.count; j++) {
 			union acpi_object *element =
 					&(package->package.elements[j]);
 
@@ -245,7 +245,7 @@ static void lpi_device_get_constraints(void)
 
 		constraint->min_dstate = -1;
 
-		for (j = 0; j < package_count; ++j) {
+		for (j = 0; j < package_count; j++) {
 			union acpi_object *info_obj = &info.package[j];
 			union acpi_object *cnstr_pkg;
 			union acpi_object *obj;