Fix block comment formatting to use * on subsequent lines
and */ on a separate line as required by kernel coding style.
Signed-off-by: Oskar Ray-Frayssinet <rayfraytech@gmail.com>
---
drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
index e70fafc095f2..0e655f79ea4a 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
@@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev)
nvec_tx_set(nvec);
to_send = nvec->tx->data[0];
nvec->tx->pos = 1;
- /* Delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug
+ /* delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug
* do not replace by usleep_range
*/
udelay(33);
--
2.43.0
On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 11:07:18PM +0100, Oskar Ray-Frayssinet wrote: > Fix block comment formatting to use * on subsequent lines > and */ on a separate line as required by kernel coding style. > > Signed-off-by: Oskar Ray-Frayssinet <rayfraytech@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c > index e70fafc095f2..0e655f79ea4a 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c > @@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev) > nvec_tx_set(nvec); > to_send = nvec->tx->data[0]; > nvec->tx->pos = 1; > - /* Delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug > + /* delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug > * do not replace by usleep_range > */ > udelay(33); > -- > 2.43.0 > > This change is not what you documented is changing :(
On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 03:59:43PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 11:07:18PM +0100, Oskar Ray-Frayssinet wrote:
> > Fix block comment formatting to use * on subsequent lines
> > and */ on a separate line as required by kernel coding style.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Oskar Ray-Frayssinet <rayfraytech@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > index e70fafc095f2..0e655f79ea4a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > @@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev)
> > nvec_tx_set(nvec);
> > to_send = nvec->tx->data[0];
> > nvec->tx->pos = 1;
> > - /* Delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug
> > + /* delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug
> > * do not replace by usleep_range
> > */
> > udelay(33);
> > --
> > 2.43.0
> >
> >
>
> This change is not what you documented is changing :(
Hm... this is the 8th version of this patch that I've seen.
I don't know why there was a flurry of these. The checkpatch warning
certainly isn't new, so maybe this was a new wave of janitors or
something? Or maybe people using AI agents to get into kernel
development. Not that it matters much, but it's not a pattern that I've
seen before.
Also, the fact that 7 out of the 8 versions came in after the first had
already landed in linux-next:
29e79c66b3cc ("staging: nvec: fix block comment style in nvec_interrupt()")
suggests that people aren't using linux-next as their baseline. Do we
need to be stricter in this regard? Seems a bit wasteful for you to have
to spend so much time looking at duplicates, even though it seems like
your automation did a lot of the work.
Thierry
On Sat, Mar 28, 2026 at 01:21:40AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 03:59:43PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 11:07:18PM +0100, Oskar Ray-Frayssinet wrote:
> > > Fix block comment formatting to use * on subsequent lines
> > > and */ on a separate line as required by kernel coding style.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Oskar Ray-Frayssinet <rayfraytech@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > > index e70fafc095f2..0e655f79ea4a 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > > @@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev)
> > > nvec_tx_set(nvec);
> > > to_send = nvec->tx->data[0];
> > > nvec->tx->pos = 1;
> > > - /* Delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug
> > > + /* delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug
> > > * do not replace by usleep_range
> > > */
> > > udelay(33);
> > > --
> > > 2.43.0
> > >
> > >
> >
> > This change is not what you documented is changing :(
>
> Hm... this is the 8th version of this patch that I've seen.
>
> I don't know why there was a flurry of these. The checkpatch warning
> certainly isn't new, so maybe this was a new wave of janitors or
> something? Or maybe people using AI agents to get into kernel
> development. Not that it matters much, but it's not a pattern that I've
> seen before.
>
> Also, the fact that 7 out of the 8 versions came in after the first had
> already landed in linux-next:
>
> 29e79c66b3cc ("staging: nvec: fix block comment style in nvec_interrupt()")
>
> suggests that people aren't using linux-next as their baseline. Do we
> need to be stricter in this regard? Seems a bit wasteful for you to have
> to spend so much time looking at duplicates, even though it seems like
> your automation did a lot of the work.
It's easy for me to reject things that obviously do not apply :)
thanks,
greg k-h
On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 3:59 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This change is not what you documented is changing :( You are right, I apologize. The commit message was incorrect. The actual change was reverting an accidental capitalization introduced in v1. I will drop this patch. Best regards, Oskar Ray-Frayssinet
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.