On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 9 May 2012, Henrik Rydberg wrote: > >> > well, the idea was to keep the memory footprint low. As these values >> > are only needed at init, then I freed them once I finished using them. >> > I can of course skip the pointer, but in that case, wouldn't the >> > struct declaration be worthless? >> >> My bad, I misread the placement of the free() statement. I was also >> concerned about memory, since HID is big enough a memory hog as it >> is. Barring the added complexity of this patch, it now makes more >> sense. >> >> Acked-by: Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c: In function ‘mt_post_parse’: > drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c:673: error: invalid type argument of ‘->’ (have ‘unsigned int’) > make[1]: *** [drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.o] Error 1 > > I believe that > > td->last_slot_field = f->usages[field_count_per_touch - 1]->hid; > > should be > > td->last_slot_field = f->usages[field_count_per_touch - 1]; Ouch, indeed. the "->hid" is extra. When I split the patch 1 and 5, I missed that one. I tested it without the ->hid, and it's good. Do I need to resend the patch? Cheers, Benjamin > > but I leave this up to you guys to fix. > > Thanks, > > -- > Jiri Kosina > SUSE Labs -- 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
