[PATCH] usb: gadget: udc: clean up comments

[Tom Rix]

On 4/11/22 5:24 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 04:49:00AM -0700, Tom Rix wrote:
>> On 4/11/22 3:22 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 11:08:28AM -0400, Tom Rix wrote:
>>>> SPDX
>>>> *.h use /* */ style comments
>>>>
>>>> For double words, remove
>>>> with, also
>>>>
>>>> Spelling replacements
>>>> wayt to way
>>>> wakup to wakeup
>>>> Contrl to Control
>>>> cheks to checks
>>>> initiaization to initialization
>>>> dyanmic to dynamic
>>> Something really wrong with indentation above.
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>    drivers/usb/gadget/udc/amd5536udc.h       | 2 +-
>>>>    drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed-vhub/core.c | 2 +-
>>>>    drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed-vhub/ep0.c  | 2 +-
>>>>    drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed-vhub/hub.c  | 2 +-
>>>>    drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed-vhub/vhub.h | 4 ++--
>>>>    drivers/usb/gadget/udc/at91_udc.c         | 2 +-
>>>>    drivers/usb/gadget/udc/bdc/bdc_core.c     | 4 ++--
>>>>    drivers/usb/gadget/udc/core.c             | 4 ++--
>>>>    drivers/usb/gadget/udc/trace.h            | 2 +-
>>> I believe that Greg's bot asks to split on per-driver basis.
>>> OTOH I don't see anything that can be problematic if in one
>>> change. So, it's up to maintainers then.
>> Yes, whatever folks want. I can split these.
>>
>> I have been cleaning up the comments in other areas and am trying to strike
>> a balance between too big of a patch vs peppering with many single changes.
> Patch series are much easier to review and is just as simple to apply as
> a single patch, so that makes it overall better for you to do.

ok

Tom

>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>