Op 05-05-10 20:01, Henrik Rydberg schreef: > Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> @@ -253,7 +253,6 @@ static void elantech_report_absolute_v2(struct psmouse *psmouse) >>> >>> /* byte 0: n1 n0 . . . . R L */ >>> fingers = (packet[0] & 0xc0) >> 6; >>> - input_report_key(dev, BTN_TOUCH, fingers != 0); >> >> Mousedev works a tad better if BTN_TOUCH is reported first. Otherwise >> looks good. >> >> Henrik, should we report "tool width" as ABS_MT_WIDTH_MAJOR? > > I might be missing some context here, I see no prior use of width in the driver. > The answer is either ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR or ABS_MT_WIDTH_MAJOR depending on how > the width is actually computed. Generally, it makes little sense to have > ABS_MT_WIDTH_MAJOR (width of approaching finger) without ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR > (width of touching finger), but it is ok to have only ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR. Things > like thumb detection requires both values to be reliable. Ok, so it seems in this case, ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR is the most appropriate... if we care at all. Let me give you some more details. From what is seems, the hardware can reports the width of a touch, but only when there is one single touch. So far we report it via ABS_TOOL_WIDTH. When there is 2 or 3 touches, the width is unknown. So the precise question is: Should we report also ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR in addition to ABS_TOOL_WIDTH, whenever it is known (ie: one finger), or just not bother and only report ABS_TOOL_WIDTH? Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
