From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 861466CF07 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2013 16:19:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 Oct 2013 09:16:16 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,493,1378882800"; d="scan'208";a="410700485" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.120.188]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 Oct 2013 09:19:17 -0700 From: Paul Eggleton To: Saul Wold , Andrea Adami Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 17:19:16 +0100 Message-ID: <3717106.1OZfuUGn9i@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.10.5 (Linux/3.8.0-31-generic; KDE/4.10.5; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: <525C152E.1040604@linux.intel.com> References: <1381761079-8709-1-git-send-email-Chase.Maupin@ti.com> <7D46E86EC0A8354091174257B2FED101597AC445@DLEE11.ent.ti.com> <525C152E.1040604@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] udev: update local rules for new touchscreen device X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 16:19:31 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi Saul, On Monday 14 October 2013 09:00:46 Saul Wold wrote: > > Andrea Adami wrote: > >> I noticed it some time ago but the patch is still on hold.... > >> http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/25093/ > > > > Thanks. I missed this. I can confirm this works for my TS device as > > well. > > There was some discussion about this back then also, I would ask that > Paul verifies that this patch is OK. I wasn't against the original patch though; meta-handheld has had a udev bbappend to sed this rule to exactly what the patch gives for a long time now. Frankly I don't understand the objections in the original discussion; just because the driver for the touchscreen doesn't provide pressure events - either because the driver is deficient or the hardware doesn't support it - it does not mean the device isn't a touchscreen and shouldn't be recognised as such by udev. Unless it is possible that the weaker rule will pick up some other non- touchscreen device as a touchscreen as a result of this change (and I doubt that is the case) then this patch should be applied. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre