Hi Henrik,
On 03/08/2014 05:11 PM, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> Hi Roger,
>
> the MT implementation seems mostly fine, just one curiosity:
>
>> static irqreturn_t pixcir_ts_isr(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> {
>> struct pixcir_i2c_ts_data *tsdata = dev_id;
>> const struct pixcir_ts_platform_data *pdata = tsdata->chip;
>> + struct pixcir_report_data report;
>>
>> while (!tsdata->exiting) {
>> - pixcir_ts_poscheck(tsdata);
>> -
>> - if (gpio_get_value(pdata->gpio_attb))
>> + /* parse packet */
>> + pixcir_ts_parse(tsdata, &report);
>> +
>> + /* report it */
>> + pixcir_ts_report(tsdata, &report);
>> +
>> + if (gpio_get_value(pdata->gpio_attb)) {
>> + if (report.num_touches) {
>> + /*
>> + * Last report with no finger up?
>> + * Do it now then.
>> + */
>> + input_mt_sync_frame(tsdata->input);
>> + input_sync(tsdata->input);
>
> Why is this special handling needed?
This is needed because the controller doesn't always report when all fingers
have left the screen. e.g. report might contain 3 fingers touched and then
gpio_attb line is de-asserted. There's no report with 0 fingers touched even
if the user's fingers have left the screen. So we never detect a BUTTON_UP.
Without this s/w workaround we observe side effects like buttons being pressed
but not released. To me it looks like a bug in the controller.
cheers,
-roger
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
