On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Gregor Riepl <onitake@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I suppose the Windows driver just works everywhere, right? > > Not really, no. > AFAIK every vendor builds their own driver using a special configuration > utility from Silead. > All the device-specific data, including panel parameters and calibration > data, is compiled into this driver. Isn't that just defeating the whole purpose of ACPI (or any other hardware description)? Isn't the idea to describe all this in ACPI tables, and that is what the vendor should be doing rather than compiling in hardcoded things into drivers? I just see this as another sign that the ACPI "ecosystem" is not really working because vendors choose to arbitrarily bypass it like this. Is it too hard for them to use ACPI or is ACPI lacking the right parameters to tweak or what is the real problem? Yours, Linus Walleij -- 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
