On Tue, 15 Oct 2013, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > >>>>> In the original HID sensor specifications all Named array enums > >>>>> stated to be 0-based. But the most commercial devices implemented > >>>>> as 1-based, because of the implementation by one of the major OS > >>>>> vendor. To fix this we added a quirk, which required module to be > >>>>> recompiled. Instead now added a module parameter, so that it can > >>>>> be switched at runtime. By default it will be 1-based to be > >>>>> compatible with majority of devices. This is true for both power > >>>>> and report state usage id for hid sensors. Also added defines for > >>>>> power on values for D0 to D4 and using it for clarity. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> This looks fine but raises a few questions... > >>>> > >>>> What other options do we have for controlling this? Are hid sensors > >>>> chips identifiable? If so can we have a list of chips where it is 0 in > >>>> the driver. The module parameter might still be needed to deal with new > >>>> devices but would be nice to have most work out of the box. > >>> We could have quirk based on vendor id/pid. But the problem is that once they update FW to be compliant with WIN8, it > >>> will not work. > >>> So there is no way to distinguish. Since sensor hub is present in most of WIN8 convertible devices, the quirk became a > >>> new normal. > >> Yuck. You have my sympathies! > >> > >>>> Got to love it when the quirk becomes the default ;) > >>> Unfortunately they don't go back to specification update after such change. > >> Just to check, is this quirk only hid-sensors related? Named arrays are > >> as far as I can see a part of HID in general. > > Currently I have information about HID sensors implementation only as they are in new in the WIN8. I didn't hear any > > complaint about any other HID devices. > Jiri, have you seen anything similar to this before. > > I am just trying to work out if it should be a Hid quirk or should be > handled only in the hid-sensors module. Sorry for super-late response from me, I have been drowned in other things. This looks indeed pretty bad. I don't have a strong objection to having this as a generic HID quirk; the argument being, if this was made de-facto Win8-mandated standard, odds are that we'd start seeing a lot of devices with this behavior. So if you decide to take this way, please send the patch to me, I'll apply it. Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
