summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/sound/oss/sb_ess.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorAndreas Mohr <andi@lisas.de>2006-06-26 18:35:02 +0200
committerAdrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>2006-06-26 18:35:02 +0200
commitd6e05edc59ecd79e8badf440c0d295a979bdfa3e (patch)
tree50362161f69317242ab603c51a18a818a4c93285 /sound/oss/sb_ess.c
parentf18190bd3407554ba6df30a1927e07e6cba93e56 (diff)
downloadlinux-d6e05edc59ecd79e8badf440c0d295a979bdfa3e.tar.gz
linux-d6e05edc59ecd79e8badf440c0d295a979bdfa3e.tar.bz2
linux-d6e05edc59ecd79e8badf440c0d295a979bdfa3e.zip
spelling fixes
acquired (aquired) contiguous (contigious) successful (succesful, succesfull) surprise (suprise) whether (weather) some other misspellings Signed-off-by: Andreas Mohr <andi@lisas.de> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
Diffstat (limited to 'sound/oss/sb_ess.c')
-rw-r--r--sound/oss/sb_ess.c28
1 files changed, 14 insertions, 14 deletions
diff --git a/sound/oss/sb_ess.c b/sound/oss/sb_ess.c
index fae05fe3de43..180e95c87e3e 100644
--- a/sound/oss/sb_ess.c
+++ b/sound/oss/sb_ess.c
@@ -97,19 +97,19 @@
*
* The documentation is an adventure: it's close but not fully accurate. I
* found out that after a reset some registers are *NOT* reset, though the
- * docs say the would be. Interresting ones are 0x7f, 0x7d and 0x7a. They are
- * related to the Audio 2 channel. I also was suprised about the consequenses
+ * docs say the would be. Interesting ones are 0x7f, 0x7d and 0x7a. They are
+ * related to the Audio 2 channel. I also was surprised about the consequences
* of writing 0x00 to 0x7f (which should be done by reset): The ES1887 moves
* into ES1888 mode. This means that it claims IRQ 11, which happens to be my
* ISDN adapter. Needless to say it no longer worked. I now understand why
* after rebooting 0x7f already was 0x05, the value of my choice: the BIOS
* did it.
*
- * Oh, and this is another trap: in ES1887 docs mixer register 0x70 is decribed
- * as if it's exactly the same as register 0xa1. This is *NOT* true. The
- * description of 0x70 in ES1869 docs is accurate however.
+ * Oh, and this is another trap: in ES1887 docs mixer register 0x70 is
+ * described as if it's exactly the same as register 0xa1. This is *NOT* true.
+ * The description of 0x70 in ES1869 docs is accurate however.
* Well, the assumption about ES1869 was wrong: register 0x70 is very much
- * like register 0xa1, except that bit 7 is allways 1, whatever you want
+ * like register 0xa1, except that bit 7 is always 1, whatever you want
* it to be.
*
* When using audio 2 mixer register 0x72 seems te be meaningless. Only 0xa2
@@ -117,10 +117,10 @@
*
* Software reset not being able to reset all registers is great! Especially
* the fact that register 0x78 isn't reset is great when you wanna change back
- * to single dma operation (simplex): audio 2 is still operation, and uses the
- * same dma as audio 1: your ess changes into a funny echo machine.
+ * to single dma operation (simplex): audio 2 is still operational, and uses
+ * the same dma as audio 1: your ess changes into a funny echo machine.
*
- * Received the new that ES1688 is detected as a ES1788. Did some thinking:
+ * Received the news that ES1688 is detected as a ES1788. Did some thinking:
* the ES1887 detection scheme suggests in step 2 to try if bit 3 of register
* 0x64 can be changed. This is inaccurate, first I inverted the * check: "If
* can be modified, it's a 1688", which lead to a correct detection
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@
* About recognition of ESS chips
*
* The distinction of ES688, ES1688, ES1788, ES1887 and ES1888 is described in
- * a (preliminary ??) datasheet on ES1887. It's aim is to identify ES1887, but
+ * a (preliminary ??) datasheet on ES1887. Its aim is to identify ES1887, but
* during detection the text claims that "this chip may be ..." when a step
* fails. This scheme is used to distinct between the above chips.
* It appears however that some PnP chips like ES1868 are recognized as ES1788
@@ -156,9 +156,9 @@
*
* The existing ES1688 support didn't take care of the ES1688+ recording
* levels very well. Whenever a device was selected (recmask) for recording
- * it's recording level was loud, and it couldn't be changed. The fact that
+ * its recording level was loud, and it couldn't be changed. The fact that
* internal register 0xb4 could take care of RECLEV, didn't work meaning until
- * it's value was restored every time the chip was reset; this reset the
+ * its value was restored every time the chip was reset; this reset the
* value of 0xb4 too. I guess that's what 4front also had (have?) trouble with.
*
* About ES1887 support:
@@ -169,9 +169,9 @@
* the latter case the recording volumes are 0.
* Now recording levels of inputs can be controlled, by changing the playback
* levels. Futhermore several devices can be recorded together (which is not
- * possible with the ES1688.
+ * possible with the ES1688).
* Besides the separate recording level control for each input, the common
- * recordig level can also be controlled by RECLEV as described above.
+ * recording level can also be controlled by RECLEV as described above.
*
* Not only ES1887 have this recording mixer. I know the following from the
* documentation: