From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [PATCH] input: bcm5974: report ABS_MT events Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:12:20 -0700 Message-ID: <20091013061220.GI2887@core.coreip.homeip.net> References: <1255386223-4109-1-git-send-email-rydberg@euromail.se> <1255386223-4109-2-git-send-email-rydberg@euromail.se> <20091012154528.6830da60.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4AD3B6E2.9020703@euromail.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com ([74.125.92.26]:56379 "EHLO qw-out-2122.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756945AbZJMGNc (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:13:32 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AD3B6E2.9020703@euromail.se> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Henrik Rydberg Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 01:08:18AM +0200, Henrik Rydberg wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:23:43 +0200 > > "Henrik Rydberg" wrote: > > > >> This patch makes bcm5974 report raw multi-touch (MT) data in the form > >> of ABS_MT events. The module parameter (nomt) may be used to turn off > >> the effect of this patch. > >> > > > > Why do we need a module parameter to disable the newly-added feature? > > All MT events bypass the input filtering and gets sent directly to the X driver. > Although it works as intended, without visible side effects, the stream of > events is rather large, and since the bypassing is completely new behavior, I > felt compelled to provide an option to turn it all off. Perhaps it is just me > being paranoid. > What is the expected rate of the events when user touches the pad with 2-3 fingers? Could you giove me estimate? > > > > IMO, your first patch ("input: bcm5974: retract efi-broken > > suspend_resume") is 2.6.32 material whereas this one is 2.6.33 > > material? > > > > This assumes that the two patches can be safely separated in this > > manner, which does appear to be the case. > > > > I was imagining both for 2.6.33; the efi booting is just beginning to work, and > since no distro is using it fully so far the problem currently only hits the > adventure-seekers anyways. I'd wait then - it works fine in non-efi mode and maybe by the time EFI is ready reset_resume will start working as well. -- Dmitry