From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265954AbUBKTFq (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:05:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261262AbUBKTFq (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:05:46 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:13793 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265954AbUBKTFc (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:05:32 -0500 Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:04:39 -0800 From: Pete Zaitcev To: Ping Cheng Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vojtech@suse.cz Subject: Re: Wacom USB driver patch Message-Id: <20040211110439.1a64fe9b.zaitcev@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.9 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:23:11 -0800 Ping Cheng wrote: > <> This looks much better, it's not line-wrapped. I have one question though, about this part: @@ -152,15 +150,103 @@ static void wacom_pl_irq(struct urb *urb + /* was entered with stylus2 pressed */ + if (wacom->tool[1] == BTN_TOOL_RUBBER && !(data[4] & 0x20) ) { + /* report out proximity for previous tool */ + input_report_key(dev, wacom->tool[1], 0); + input_sync(dev); + wacom->tool[1] = BTN_TOOL_PEN; + return; + } Is it safe to just return without resubmitting the urb here? @@ -231,8 +317,12 @@ static void wacom_graphire_irq(struct ur + /* check if we can handle the data */ + if (data[0] == 99) + return; + if (data[0] != 2) Same here. Also, please add the path to the patch, e.g. always use recursive diff. -- Pete