On Wednesday 05 September 2012 21:58:06 Yann Cantin wrote: > As ebeams are the only devices to my knowledge that work that way, i don't think > a common API can be common, unless we mean an in-kernel generic purpose calibration > API for input devices (stellar away for me), or a userland one (where should it be > in the stack ?). Sincerely, this look overkill. > > In the other hand, the actual ebeam module transformation feeding events subsys > works very well and expose straight and usable data to userland (xorg evdev for now, > and any program that can eat kernel's input data). OK, I see the problem. You have no other choice. > ## > > I understand the sysfs interface is a problem. Eventually, in last resort, i can reduce > it to 4 files : pass the 9 matrix parameters as one big string, removing min values. But > i think this obfuscate the api for a marginal gain. That would be wrong. The problem is a specific API. If it needs to be done at all, it better be done as cleanly as possible. Regards Oliver -- 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
