From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Henrik Rydberg" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] autodetection of multitouch devices Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:46:35 +0200 Message-ID: <20110926144635.GA6921@polaris.bitmath.org> References: <1316617015-11648-1-git-send-email-benjamin.tissoires@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from smtprelay-b22.telenor.se ([195.54.99.213]:43136 "EHLO smtprelay-b22.telenor.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751195Ab1IZOnM (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:43:12 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Jiri Kosina Cc: Benjamin Tissoires , Dmitry Torokhov , Benjamin Tissoires , Stephane Chatty , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 02:20:08PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Wed, 21 Sep 2011, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > > Hi Guys, > > > > These two patches finally enable the kernel to handle multitouch devices correctly. > > If a device presents in its report descriptors the usage Contact ID, then it is considered as > > a multitouch device and handled by hid-multitouch. > > Hi Banjamin, > > thanks a lot for working on this. I have now queued the patches in my > tree. Hi Benjamin, Late as it seems, here are a couple of questions: 1. How was this tested? By removing all white-listed devices in hid-multitouch.c to see if the usual suspects are still picked up? 2. Having the device blacklist inside hid-multitouch.c seems awkward. I can see the benefits of putting it in a module, but is there any other rationale? Right now the blacklist duplicates the hid whitelist. Thanks, Henrik