From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [PATCH] input: push down scancode negative checking Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:00:53 -0400 Message-ID: <20080707150041.ZZRA012@mailhub.coreip.homeip.net> References: <1214854426-20442-1-git-send-email-dwalker@mvista.com> <20080630154701.ZZRA012@mailhub.coreip.homeip.net> <1214855780.5764.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1214933005.5764.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from yw-out-2324.google.com ([74.125.46.31]:17326 "EHLO yw-out-2324.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755223AbYGGTBD (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:01:03 -0400 Received: by yw-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 9so1037700ywe.1 for ; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1214933005.5764.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Walker Cc: Jiri Kosina , Philippe Troin , "Adolfo R. Brandes" , linux-input@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 10:23:25AM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-07-01 at 09:51 +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > > >> Hmm, I wonder if we just need to type these as unsigned. > > > I think it would make sense, because AFAIK scancodes don't really have a > > > concept of signed-ness anyway .. I almost did it that way, but I wasn't > > > sure enough about the reasoning for the signed int .. > > > > That would be the option I'd prefer too. > > Do you guys want me to send another patch for this? > Yes please. -- Dmitry