From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161079AbVLOIhP (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:37:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161084AbVLOIhP (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:37:15 -0500 Received: from hansmi.home.forkbomb.ch ([213.144.146.165]:30237 "EHLO hansmi.home.forkbomb.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161079AbVLOIhN (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:37:13 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:37:11 +0100 From: Michael Hanselmann To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Johannes Berg , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, stelian@popies.net, kernel-stuff@comcast.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6 1/2] usb/input: Add relayfs support to appletouch driver Message-ID: <20051215083711.GA29034@hansmi.ch> References: <20051213223659.GB20017@hansmi.ch> <20051214233108.GA20127@hansmi.ch> <200512142243.28390.dtor_core@ameritech.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200512142243.28390.dtor_core@ameritech.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 10:43:27PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > The adjusted patch is below. I am still not sure if this really should be > in mainline. Was it ever used? That patch looks fine for me. I would like to see it in mainline because it makes debugging and figuring out new protocols much easier. For example, Apple changed the protocol with the latest PowerBooks (see the other patch for that). Why should everyone willing to implement a new protocol rewrite this code?