On Thursday 20 of February 2014 16:16:52 Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Wed, 5 Feb 2014, Michal Malý wrote: > > > > We need to think carefully on this as a '+10' combined with '-10' > > > > force > > > > will result in '0'; however we do not want to deactivate the wheel > > > > (no-resistance mode) as this will result in 'ticking' on the wheel as > > > > force transitions through 0.... ideally we'd need to know that there > > > > are > > > > no forces set. > > > > > > No problem Simon, this is thought about: > > > If forces are active, and they cancel out, hid_lg4ff_start_combined is > > > called with 0 force (scaled_x = 0x80), instead of > > > hid_lg4ff_stop_combined > > > as you assumed. > > > > Okay, so to set things straight: I should modify to patch to send 0x13 > > when > > the effect is fully stopped and use 0x11 0x80 to only zeroize the force > > when the overall force is zero? My DFP doesn't differentiate between > > these states so I cannot tell what is the right thing to do. > > Has there been any conclusion to this, please? Yes the has and the necessary fix is already in place in my working copy along with another few fixed to the ff-memless-next. Do you consider our approach sane and viable for mainlining? I've already explained to Joe Perches why I propose ff-memless-next as a separate module rather than a patch to ff-memless we have now. Unless anybody has any objections I'll check in with the rest of the guys and submit a hopefully final version within a day or two. Michal -- 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
