On Sun, 2015-09-20 at 20:08 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On 19/09/15 20:03, Mike Mestnik wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Daniel Baluta < > > daniel.baluta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Mike Mestnik < > > > cheako@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I'm looking to know the result of adding ACPI support for a > > > > new > > > > tablet, the existing support shouldn't work because of a > > > > misplaced > > > > __init that causes the function to be removed prior to being > > > > called. > > > > > > Are you sure about this? It seems that the existing support > > > doesn't work > > > because you have different product ids. > > > > > The driver worked much better prior to me adding the product ids. > > The > > sensors were exposed to sysfs and all the data they collected > > seemed > > correct to me. The big issue is that there is no software, even > > iio-sensor-proxy didn't know how to access the data. > Cc'd Bastien Nocera. iio-sensor-proxy not finding the sensor, and with it working otherwise, would be an iio-sensor-proxy bug. I have one of those already for the accelerometer in the WinBook TW100 that I haven't had time to root down though. See: https://github.com/hadess/iio-sensor-proxy/issues/39 The main problem being that sensor types are already hard to detect, and the iio subsystem doesn't make it any easier to check whether there's buffered output available, or the application needs to poll. If anyone wants to fix that in the kernel, that would certainly make my life easier. Cheers -- 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
