From: Florian Ragwitz <rafl@debian.org>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc: "Éric Piel" <E.A.B.Piel@tudelft.nl>,
"linux-input@vger.kernel.org" <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] elantech: Report tool width when it is known
Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 20:00:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100505180048.GH6075@perldition.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100505171350.GE7337@core.coreip.homeip.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1276 bytes --]
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 10:13:50AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 06:58:18PM +0200, Éric Piel wrote:
> > Op 05-05-10 18:39, Dmitry Torokhov schreef:
> > > I think we shoudl have threshold for the firmware version when we start
> > > reporting the width.
> > >
> > What do you mean? That the width might not be reported correctly by all
> > the firmwares? I have no idea if that is the case. For info, IIRC my
> > firmware report 2.1 with middle byte 8.
>
> My understanding was that older firmwares would report 0. I might be
> mistaken.
Some firmwares always set the upper bits to 0. Others don't.
As far as I can see, we only know about firmware version 2.1 and 4.1
using those high bits for width reports.
However, there's firmware versions inbetween, like 2.48, which don't
report width information. And there's even other firmware versions
inbetween, like 2.36, which actually implment what the driver calls
hardware version 1. Those have a quite different packet format, and also
no width information.
Currently it seems to be unknown how to detect hw ver 1 vs. 2 based on
the firmware version. Guesses tend towards the middle bit being
signifficant, somehow.
--
BOFH excuse #136:
Daemons loose in system.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-05 18:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-05 12:14 [PATCH 1/2] elantech: Report tool width when it is known Éric Piel
2010-05-05 16:39 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-05-05 16:58 ` Éric Piel
2010-05-05 17:13 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-05-05 18:00 ` Florian Ragwitz [this message]
2010-05-05 18:09 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-05-05 18:13 ` Éric Piel
2010-05-05 16:53 ` Florian Ragwitz
2010-05-05 17:12 ` Dmitry Torokhov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100505180048.GH6075@perldition.org \
--to=rafl@debian.org \
--cc=E.A.B.Piel@tudelft.nl \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).