From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Javier Martinez Canillas Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Input: atmel_mxt_ts - Add support for T100 multi-touch Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:49:09 +0100 Message-ID: <54906285.3060907@collabora.co.uk> References: <1418639947-28765-1-git-send-email-javier.martinez@collabora.co.uk> <54905AD7.4070205@itdev.co.uk> <54905F00.4020107@collabora.co.uk> <54906031.8020309@itdev.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <54906031.8020309@itdev.co.uk> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Nick Dyer Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , Henrik Rydberg , Sjoerd Simons , Doug Anderson , Olof Johansson , Yufeng Shen , Benson Leung , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org Hello Nick, On 12/16/2014 05:39 PM, Nick Dyer wrote: > On 16/12/14 16:34, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> On 12/16/2014 05:16 PM, Nick Dyer wrote: >>>> Nick Dyer (1): >>>> Input: atmel_mxt_ts - Implement support for T100 touch object >>> I posted an updated version of this patch on 9th December and would prefer >>> you apply that rather than this version, since it contains some useful >>> additional work. >>> >>> A link to it: >>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg1885519.html >> >> Great, I didn't know about your patch since I was not in the cc list. >> >> Thanks for posting and feel free to discard these patches. > > No worries! Do you want me to put you on CC in future? > Yes, please cc me and also to Sjoerd since we are working on machines that have Atmel maxtouch chips. > I will add a todo to pick up your second change "Split out touchpad > initialisation logic" into patches I have waiting for upstream, it is a > sensible refactoring I think. > Awesome, what do you think about the change to have a common input device initialization function that I squashed in your original patch? mxt_initialize_t100_input_device() and mxt_initialize_t9_input_device() are very similar so I think that is a sensible refactoring as well. If you agree with the change I can post it on top of your patch once it lands in mainline. Best regards, Javier