Hi Nikolai On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov <spbnick@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi David, > > > On 03/31/2012 02:03 AM, David Herrmann wrote: >> >> Rebinding works perfectly well for me. I use it all the time when >> testing HID drivers. > > > Thank you. > > I've tried it, but it doesn't work for me, because HID report descriptors > are not re-parsed after rebinding and I rely on report_fixup's a lot. Please > see my reply to Jiri for slightly more details: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.input/23708/focus=24337 > > >> Furthermore, there is a dynid-implementation in the kernel so when hacking >> on something like this I'd recommend using this. It would also remove the >> hard limit that you currently have. > > > Thanks, but this doesn't suit me currently. I don't implement report parsing > in my drivers, but rather describe every device protocol separately with a > report descriptor and rely on the generic driver for parsing. Thus, I save > in code complexity and maintenance, but loose in portability. I think you don't understand me correctly. I meant instead of using some static global table in the module you could instead implement something like the "new_id"/store_new_id()/dyn_list/dyn_lock mechanism but for the special_driver-id-array. So one could use "echo vid:pid >/sys/bus/hid/new_special_driver_id" and it would be added to a linked list which is checked additionally to the static array. Such a mechanism is already used by all kinds of buses, hid, usb, pci... but only for the id-lists of drivers, not a global module list. At least this would look less hackish than a fixed-length-array module parameter ;) > However, I plan to make a non-HID driver for Waltop tablets, using their > proprietary, HID-incompatible protocol and there I will probably use that. > > Sincerely, > Nick Regards David -- 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
