Hi Dmitry,
On 01/22/2015 09:02 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 08:52:25PM +0100, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
>> int input_mt_assign_slots(struct input_dev *dev, int *slots,
>> - const struct input_mt_pos *pos, int num_pos)
>> + const struct input_mt_pos *pos, int num_pos,
>> + int dmax)
>
> Should dmax be unsigned and do we really need to treat 0 specially or we
> could use UNIT_MAX as "don't care" value?
We could have dmax unsigned, but it does not have to be from a branching
perspective, since the square is what gets used anyways.
>> {
>> struct input_mt *mt = dev->mt;
>> + int mu = 2 * dmax * dmax;
>
> For my education, what does "mu" stand for?
I chose mu because of the mathematical similarity to the chemical potential in
statistical mechanics, where it denotes the energy per particle. Here, it
denotes the energy per contact assignment.
> Ideally, if someone could create a
> write-up on the contact matching that would be most awesome.
Heh, I guess I will have to write something at some point, without requiring
prior knowledge of Lagrange relaxation or the like. Time is a luxury these days...
Henrik
--
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
