On Thu, 8 Dec 2016, Rob Herring wrote: > > And if tomorrow there is Elan device that is drop-in compatible (same > > connector, etc) with Wacom i2c-hid, will you ask for Elan-specific > > binding? Atmel? Weida? They all need to be powered up ultimately. > > Yes, I will. What advantage does that bring? > That in no way means the OS driver has to know about each and every one. > If they can all claim compatibility with Wacom (including power > control), then they can have a Wacom compatible string too. Or you can > just never tell me that there's a different manufacturer and I won't > care as long you don't need different control. But soon as a device > needs another power rail, GPIO or different timing, then you'd better > have a new compatible string. Again, I simply don't understand what advantage does the aproach you are trying to use bring. HID over I2C is a generic protocol. Sure, we need to have quirks for device-specific bugs, and in such cases enumerate particular devices. But we don't need DT for that at all. -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- 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
