On Mon, 6 May 2024 15:05:52 +0300
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx, robh@xxxxxxxxxx, krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx, conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx, u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx, siebren.vroegindeweij@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-input@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] Input: ektf2127 - add ektf2232 support
> Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 15:05:52 +0300
>
> On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 12:48 AM Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > The chip is similar, but has status bits at different positions,
> > so use the correct bits.
>
> ...
>
> > @@ -46,6 +47,11 @@ struct ektf2127_ts {
> > struct input_dev *input;
> > struct gpio_desc *power_gpios;
> > struct touchscreen_properties prop;
> > + int status_shift;
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct ektf2127_i2c_chip_data {
> > + int status_shift;
> > };
> >
> > static void ektf2127_parse_coordinates(const u8 *buf, unsigned int touch_count,
>
> I'm wondering if you are using --histogram diff algo when preparing the patches.
No, I am not using that, it seems to not make that chunk nicer.
Yes, we want
+ int status_shift;
};
+
+struct ektf2127_i2c_chip_data {
+ int status_shift;
+};
But that is not shorter or simpler, just more readable.
Regards,
Andreas
