Hi On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > hid_output_raw_report() is not a ll_driver callback and should not be used. > To keep the same code path than before, we are forced to play with the > different hid_hw_* calls: if the usb or i2c device does not support > direct output reports, then we will rely on the SET_REPORT HID call. > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/hid/hid-input.c | 10 +++++++--- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-input.c b/drivers/hid/hid-input.c > index eb00a5b..6b7bdca 100644 > --- a/drivers/hid/hid-input.c > +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-input.c > @@ -1153,7 +1153,7 @@ static void hidinput_led_worker(struct work_struct *work) > led_work); > struct hid_field *field; > struct hid_report *report; > - int len; > + int len, ret; > __u8 *buf; > > field = hidinput_get_led_field(hid); > @@ -1187,7 +1187,10 @@ static void hidinput_led_worker(struct work_struct *work) > > hid_output_report(report, buf); > /* synchronous output report */ > - hid_output_raw_report(hid, buf, len, HID_OUTPUT_REPORT); > + ret = hid_hw_output_report(hid, buf, len); > + if (ret == -ENOSYS) > + hid_hw_raw_request(hid, buf[0], buf, len, HID_OUTPUT_REPORT, > + HID_REQ_SET_REPORT); Does HID core always set the report-id in buf[0]? Even if none are used? I know the incoming data may lack the report-id, but I always thought we do the same for outgoing if it's implicit? I also already see devices with broken OUTPUT_REPORTs.. I guess at some point we have to introduce a quirk-flag to choose between both calls. But lets wait for that to happen, maybe we're lucky. > kfree(buf); > } > > @@ -1266,7 +1269,8 @@ static struct hid_input *hidinput_allocate(struct hid_device *hid) > } > > input_set_drvdata(input_dev, hid); > - if (hid->ll_driver->request || hid->hid_output_raw_report) > + if (hid->ll_driver->request || hid->ll_driver->output_report || > + hid->ll_driver->raw_request) Isn't raw_request mandatory? So we could remove that whole if() thing here. Thanks David > input_dev->event = hidinput_input_event; > input_dev->open = hidinput_open; > input_dev->close = hidinput_close; > -- > 1.8.3.1 > -- 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
