From: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
To: Hn Chen <hn.chen@weidahitech.com>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
"linux-input@vger.kernel.org" <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Input: wdt87xx_i2c - support new body WDT8752
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 15:55:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160905135545.GL21864@mail.corp.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <22498D53301C4D4A8FFA8F02C7C3C7C06DDD7D42@mail02.WHT.local>
Hi HN,
On Sep 05 2016 or thereabouts, Hn Chen wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> >> Considering to be compatible with i2c-hid, WDT8752 has the same way in
> >> enumerating device.
> >If it is a HID device then I think you should write a HID driver for it (unless existing driver, such as hid-multitouch can already handle it, possibly >with some changes). I'm addng Benjamin to he can comment as well.
> The device can be handled by i2c-hid driver (HID over I2C) already but this proprietary driver still is a must-have for more features.
Then what are those must-have features? From what I can read, only the
reflashing firmware is part of it. Unless there is something else, I
really don't understand why you can't have a hid-weidatech driver that
could handle the specific bits while leaving the rest to i2c-hid.
Also, I am not sure if your driver doesn't interfere with i2c-hid as you
are claiming the device through the ACPI ID "WDHT0001" but there should
be some PNP IDs "PNP0C50" if it were declared as i2c-hid. If both are
set, then the fact your driver is picked up seems to be pure luck: there
will be a race between the probe of your driver and i2c-hid, which is
not something you want.
If there are some issues with i2c-hid, I'd like also to know them
because if we fix them for you there is a high chance other vendors
will benefit from those fixes too.
Cheers,
Benjamin
>
> >> And also modify the part of FW update to be more efficiency. The main
> >> modification is that reducing the amount of data transmitted and using
> >> polling for time comsuming operation.
> >>
> >> Flash erase will wait 50ms for the operation complete in last driver.
> >> Extend it to 200ms since the spec says the typical is 30ms but the max
> >> is 200ms.
> >This should be split into a separate patch please.
> Ok, I will resubmit the part of possible-issue fixing and then the driver patch for supporting WDT8752 again.
> Please ignore this submission.
>
> Hn.chen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-05 13:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-03 10:16 [PATCH] Input: wdt87xx_i2c - support new body WDT8752 HungNien Chen
2016-09-02 6:40 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2016-09-05 7:32 ` Hn Chen
2016-09-05 13:55 ` Benjamin Tissoires [this message]
2016-09-06 11:47 ` Hn Chen
2016-10-07 23:46 ` 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=20160905135545.GL21864@mail.corp.redhat.com \
--to=benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=hn.chen@weidahitech.com \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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