On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:34:29PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > 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. Any more details? Does the driver bind to the device? Is there data coming form the wire and it is being consumed but not parsed properly? Something else? Thanks. -- Dmitry
