Please revert 3eea8b5d68c801fec788b411582b803463834752 as it breaks touchscreen on n900.
pavel at ucw.cz
Mon Jun 1 13:27:40 PDT 2015
On Mon 2015-06-01 10:47:30, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 05:21:11PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > > The 3eea8b5d68c801fec788b411582b803463834752 is just bad.
> > > > >
> > > > > You were very welcome to review this patch at the time and/or suggest
> > > > > a fix that pleases everyone.
> > > >
> > > > You should be the one that should suggest fixes, as you broke it in
> > > > the first place. But clearly you don't understand that.
> > >
> > > You actually never asked for a fix, and went head first calling this
> > > patch "bad" and asking for nothing but reverting it.
> > Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 21:08:16 +0200
> > Subject: 4.1 touchscreen regression on n900 -- pinpointed [was Re:
> > linux-n900
> > ...
> > Maxime, can you suggest a fix?
> How about we do something like below (it needs a small edt-ft5x06 fixup
> that I'll send separately). Not tested.
+ data_present = touchscreen_get_prop_u32(np,
+ &maximum) |
+ if (data_present)
+ touchscreen_set_params(dev, axis, maximum, fuzz);
Umm. So you are changing behaviour from "whatever was there" to
"input_abs_get_maximum"... in n900 case. Is that a good idea for a
regression fix this late in release cycle?
Maxime's patch should be easy to fix...
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
More information about the linux-arm-kernel