[PATCH v2 2/5] can: bcm: use CAN frame instead of can_frame in comments

[Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>]

can_frame is the name of the struct can_frame which is not meant in comments.

Signed-off-by: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
---
 net/can/bcm.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++----------------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/can/bcm.c b/net/can/bcm.c
index 1f4ccc3..59553de 100644
--- a/net/can/bcm.c
+++ b/net/can/bcm.c
@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ MODULE_LICENSE("Dual BSD/GPL");
 MODULE_AUTHOR("Oliver Hartkopp <oliver.hartkopp@volkswagen.de>");
 MODULE_ALIAS("can-proto-2");
 
-/* easy access to can_frame payload */
+/* easy access to CAN frame payload */
 static inline u64 GET_U64(const struct can_frame *cp)
 {
 	return *(u64 *)cp->data;
@@ -307,13 +307,13 @@ static void bcm_send_to_user(struct bcm_op *op, struct bcm_msg_head *head,
 	memcpy(skb_put(skb, sizeof(*head)), head, sizeof(*head));
 
 	if (head->nframes) {
-		/* can_frames starting here */
+		/* CAN frames starting here */
 		firstframe = (struct can_frame *)skb_tail_pointer(skb);
 
 		memcpy(skb_put(skb, datalen), frames, datalen);
 
 		/*
-		 * the BCM uses the can_dlc-element of the can_frame
+		 * the BCM uses the can_dlc-element of the CAN frame
 		 * structure for internal purposes. This is only
 		 * relevant for updates that are generated by the
 		 * BCM, where nframes is 1
@@ -494,7 +494,7 @@ static void bcm_rx_cmp_to_index(struct bcm_op *op, unsigned int index,
 		return;
 	}
 
-	/* do a real check in can_frame data section */
+	/* do a real check in CAN frame data section */
 
 	if ((GET_U64(&op->frames[index]) & GET_U64(rxdata)) !=
 	    (GET_U64(&op->frames[index]) & GET_U64(&op->last_frames[index]))) {
@@ -503,7 +503,7 @@ static void bcm_rx_cmp_to_index(struct bcm_op *op, unsigned int index,
 	}
 
 	if (op->flags & RX_CHECK_DLC) {
-		/* do a real check in can_frame dlc */
+		/* do a real check in CAN frame dlc */
 		if (rxdata->can_dlc != (op->last_frames[index].can_dlc &
 					BCM_CAN_DLC_MASK)) {
 			bcm_rx_update_and_send(op, &op->last_frames[index],
@@ -556,7 +556,7 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart bcm_rx_timeout_handler(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
 
 	/* if user wants to be informed, when cyclic CAN-Messages come back */
 	if ((op->flags & RX_ANNOUNCE_RESUME) && op->last_frames) {
-		/* clear received can_frames to indicate 'nothing received' */
+		/* clear received CAN frames to indicate 'nothing received' */
 		memset(op->last_frames, 0, op->nframes * CFSIZ);
 	}
 
@@ -842,7 +842,7 @@ static int bcm_tx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 	if (!ifindex)
 		return -ENODEV;
 
-	/* check nframes boundaries - we need at least one can_frame */
+	/* check nframes boundaries - we need at least one CAN frame */
 	if (msg_head->nframes < 1 || msg_head->nframes > MAX_NFRAMES)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
@@ -853,14 +853,14 @@ static int bcm_tx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 		/* update existing BCM operation */
 
 		/*
-		 * Do we need more space for the can_frames than currently
+		 * Do we need more space for the CAN frames than currently
 		 * allocated? -> This is a _really_ unusual use-case and
 		 * therefore (complexity / locking) it is not supported.
 		 */
 		if (msg_head->nframes > op->nframes)
 			return -E2BIG;
 
-		/* update can_frames content */
+		/* update CAN frames content */
 		for (i = 0; i < msg_head->nframes; i++) {
 			err = memcpy_from_msg((u8 *)&op->frames[i], msg, CFSIZ);
 
@@ -885,7 +885,7 @@ static int bcm_tx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 
 		op->can_id    = msg_head->can_id;
 
-		/* create array for can_frames and copy the data */
+		/* create array for CAN frames and copy the data */
 		if (msg_head->nframes > 1) {
 			op->frames = kmalloc(msg_head->nframes * CFSIZ,
 					     GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -968,7 +968,7 @@ static int bcm_tx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 
 	if (op->flags & STARTTIMER) {
 		hrtimer_cancel(&op->timer);
-		/* spec: send can_frame when starting timer */
+		/* spec: send CAN frame when starting timer */
 		op->flags |= TX_ANNOUNCE;
 	}
 
@@ -1017,7 +1017,7 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 		/* update existing BCM operation */
 
 		/*
-		 * Do we need more space for the can_frames than currently
+		 * Do we need more space for the CAN frames than currently
 		 * allocated? -> This is a _really_ unusual use-case and
 		 * therefore (complexity / locking) it is not supported.
 		 */
@@ -1025,7 +1025,7 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 			return -E2BIG;
 
 		if (msg_head->nframes) {
-			/* update can_frames content */
+			/* update CAN frames content */
 			err = memcpy_from_msg((u8 *)op->frames, msg,
 					      msg_head->nframes * CFSIZ);
 			if (err < 0)
@@ -1050,7 +1050,7 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 		op->nframes   = msg_head->nframes;
 
 		if (msg_head->nframes > 1) {
-			/* create array for can_frames and copy the data */
+			/* create array for CAN frames and copy the data */
 			op->frames = kmalloc(msg_head->nframes * CFSIZ,
 					     GFP_KERNEL);
 			if (!op->frames) {
@@ -1058,7 +1058,7 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 				return -ENOMEM;
 			}
 
-			/* create and init array for received can_frames */
+			/* create and init array for received CAN frames */
 			op->last_frames = kzalloc(msg_head->nframes * CFSIZ,
 						  GFP_KERNEL);
 			if (!op->last_frames) {
@@ -1329,7 +1329,7 @@ static int bcm_sendmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg, size_t size)
 		break;
 
 	case TX_SEND:
-		/* we need exactly one can_frame behind the msg head */
+		/* we need exactly one CAN frame behind the msg head */
 		if ((msg_head.nframes != 1) || (size != CFSIZ + MHSIZ))
 			ret = -EINVAL;
 		else
-- 
2.8.1