Hi, On 01/29/2015 08:50 PM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Benjamin Tissoires > <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:34 AM, Daniel Martin >> <daniel.martin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> From: Daniel Martin <consume.noise@xxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> If we queried min/max dimensions of x [1266..5674], y [1170..4684] we >>> have post-2013 model and don't need to apply any quirk. >>> >>> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91541 >>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Martin <consume.noise@xxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/input/mouse/synaptics.c | 5 +++++ >>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/input/mouse/synaptics.c b/drivers/input/mouse/synaptics.c >>> index 37d4dff..f6c43ff 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/input/mouse/synaptics.c >>> +++ b/drivers/input/mouse/synaptics.c >>> @@ -420,6 +420,11 @@ static int synaptics_quirks(struct psmouse *psmouse) >>> struct synaptics_data *priv = psmouse->private; >>> int i; >>> >>> + /* Post-2013 models expose correct dimensions. */ >>> + if (priv->x_min == 1266 && priv->x_max == 5674 && >>> + priv->y_min == 1170 && priv->y_max == 4684) >>> + return 0; >>> + >> >> Well, this one, I don't like it either :( >> >> At least, the test should be within the psmouse_matches_pnp_id() below >> to ensure we are deciding with Lenovo devices only. >> >> The other concern is hardcoding these values in the code directly. >> What if Synaptics/Lenovo decides to ship a new released model with >> proper min_max ranges but with a different offset? >> >> Andrew told us that the board ID should be enough to discriminate old >> and faulty touchpads from the new and valid touchpads. >> >> My concern here is that we will have to backport these changes in the >> various stable kernel and the various distributions. And if we do not >> end up with the right solution right now, that means that we will have >> to do the job over and over. >> >> I am quite tempted to find a solution in the userspace for that fix. >> Not sure I'll be able to find the right one right now, but it may >> worth trying. >> > > So, the user space solution seems difficult because we do not export > either the board_id or the firmware_id. So that would required to > update the kernel anyway, a bunch of user space tools and a hwdb... :( > > How about we just add an extra min/max in struct min_max_quirk, > compare the current min/max with the 2 possible values and if there is > a match, we do not override the values. > This way, we keep the crap of wrong/correct min max in the small list > of device we know are problematic, and if the new batch of E540 has a > different correct min/max range, then we will be able to adjust it > without breaking the other we fixed. > > Dmitry, Hans, any comments on this? I'm thinking more along the lines of adding a max_broken_board_id field to the quirks, and if the touchpad board_id is larger then the max_broken_board_id not use the quirk. Regards, Hans -- 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
