On 8/11/19 6:42 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 11:30:29PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 8/10/19 9:05 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 08:00:14PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>> On 8/10/19 7:44 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>>>> On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 06:50:08PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>>>> On 8/10/19 6:41 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Marek, >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 02, 2019 at 03:17:04PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>>>>>> Add support for ILI2117 touch controller. This controller is similar >>>>>>>> to the ILI210x and ILI251x, except for the following differences: >>>>>>>> - Reading out of touch data must happen at most 300 mS after the >>>>>>>> interrupt line was asserted. No command must be sent, the data >>>>>>>> are returned upon pure I2C read of 43 bytes long. >>>>>>>> - Supports 10 simultaneous touch inputs. >>>>>>>> - Touch data format is slightly different. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So with this and also I see there is another ili2117a submission, I do >>>>>>> believe that we need to switch to using function pointers instead of >>>>>>> if/else if/else style cheking of the model. >>>>>> >>>>>> How about we add tested functionality in first and only then do bigger >>>>>> untested changes ? I think that would work better for everyone. >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, I would really prefer to do what is right and build additional >>>>> functionality on top of the good foundation. I asked to switch to the >>>>> function pointers before, but you did not want to citing performance >>>>> (even though we are using function pointers everywhere in the kernel), >>>>> now I gave a draft implementation, I hope you can use it. >>>> >>>> So why can't we add tested code in first and then add new huge untested >>>> patch on top and start testing it ? I think doing it in reverse is >>>> actually not helpful, if there is a problem in this massive new patch, >>>> it could be reverted without losing functionality. >>> >>> We still have 4 weeks till merge window + stabilization time past it. >> >> Sure, but this patch was posted 5 months ago and was in real world >> deployment since, so it has 5 months of practical testing. I don't want >> to throw that away. >> >> The patch you want me to test can easily be rebased on the ILI2117 >> support and then we retain those months of testing, which I think is >> much better. > > OK, fine, I rebased the patch[es] on top of this one and uploaded to: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dtor/input.git iili2xxx-touchscreen > > Please give it a try and if it works I'll merge into next. Sorry for the delay. I had to revert Input: ili210x - define and use chip operations structure as with ^ I get no events. The Input: ili210x - switch to using threaded IRQ seems to work. Note that you forgot to apply Input: ili210x - Add DT binding for the Ilitek ILI2117 touch controller -- Best regards, Marek Vasut
