From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mika Westerberg Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] HID: sensor-hub: don't limit the driver only to USB bus Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 13:54:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20130218115429.GB2338@intel.com> References: <1360578679-7029-1-git-send-email-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> <1360578679-7029-3-git-send-email-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> <51220A68.9030608@ahsoftware.de> <20130218111217.GL20771@intel.com> <51220F12.2060908@ahsoftware.de> <20130218113320.GA2338@intel.com> <51221290.1040005@ahsoftware.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:55721 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751295Ab3BRLuT (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 06:50:19 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51221290.1040005@ahsoftware.de> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Alexander Holler Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Kosina , Benjamin Tissoires , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:37:52PM +0100, Alexander Holler wrote: > Am 18.02.2013 12:33, schrieb Mika Westerberg: > >On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:22:58PM +0100, Alexander Holler wrote: > >>Am 18.02.2013 12:12, schrieb Mika Westerberg: > >>>On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:03:04PM +0100, Alexander Holler wrote: > >>>>Am 11.02.2013 11:31, schrieb Mika Westerberg: > >>>>>We now have two transport mediums: USB and I2C, where sensor hubs can > >>>>>exists. So instead of constraining the driver to only these two we let it > >>>>>to match any HID bus as long as the group is HID_GROUP_SENSOR_HUB. > >>>>> > >>>>>Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg > >>>>>--- > >>>>> drivers/hid/hid-sensor-hub.c | 3 ++- > >>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>>>> > >>>>>diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-sensor-hub.c b/drivers/hid/hid-sensor-hub.c > >>>>>index 2643bce9..c01f10d 100644 > >>>>>--- a/drivers/hid/hid-sensor-hub.c > >>>>>+++ b/drivers/hid/hid-sensor-hub.c > >>>>>@@ -603,7 +603,8 @@ static void sensor_hub_remove(struct hid_device *hdev) > >>>>> } > >>>>> > >>>>> static const struct hid_device_id sensor_hub_devices[] = { > >>>>>- { HID_DEVICE(BUS_USB, HID_GROUP_SENSOR_HUB, HID_ANY_ID, HID_ANY_ID) }, > >>>>>+ { HID_DEVICE(HID_BUS_ANY, HID_GROUP_SENSOR_HUB, HID_ANY_ID, > >>>>>+ HID_ANY_ID) }, > >>>>> { } > >>>>> }; > >>>>> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(hid, sensor_hub_devices); > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>Hmm, what happens with Bluetooth sensor-hubs? Is the driver now able > >>>>to handle them too? > >>> > >>>It should, yes. > >> > >>If so, I think patch 1/3 should be modified accordingly. > > > >Do you know if such devices exists currently? If not, I'm not sure if it > >makes sense to do that now. > > The CC2541DK-SENSOR from TI looks like one. But I'm not sure as I > don't have one. Besides that, I think Bluetooth (especially with > BT4LE) will be by far the most used bus for sensors hubs. OK, thanks. In that case I think it's best to remove the explicit bus check from the condition completely and rely on the fact that page == HID_UP_SENSOR. Since Jiri already applied this patch, I can make an incremental patch which removes the explicit bus check, if there are no objections.