linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/6] Input: elantech

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87aab746ys.fsf@emc.com.tw>
Date:	Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:35:55 +0800
From:	JJ Ding <jj_ding@....com.tw>
To:	gaowanlong@...fujitsu.com, Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@...omium.org>
Cc:	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Aaron Huang <aaron_huang@....com.tw>,
	Tom Lin <tom_lin@....com.tw>,
	Eric Piel <E.A.B.Piel@...elft.nl>,
	Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@...onical.com>,
	Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...omail.se>,
	Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...l.unipv.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] Input: elantech - clean up elantech_init

Hi Wanlong Gao, Daniel,

On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 11:08:08 +0800, Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On 08/18/2011 11:04 AM, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:57 AM, JJ Ding<jj_ding@....com.tw>  wrote:
> >>   /*
> >> + * determine hardware version and set some properties according to it.
> >> + */
> >> +static void elantech_set_properties(struct elantech_data *etd)
> >> +{
> >> +       /*
> >> +        * Assume every version greater than 0x020030 is new EeePC style
> >> +        * hardware with 6 byte packets, except 0x020600
> >> +        */
> >> +       if (etd->fw_version<  0x020030 || etd->fw_version == 0x020600)
> >> +               etd->hw_version = 1;
> >> +       else
> >> +               etd->hw_version = 2;
> >> +
> >> +       /*
> >> +        * Turn on packet checking by default.
> >> +        */
> >> +       etd->paritycheck = 1;
> >
> > Assuming paritycheck goes away:
> Agree.
I thought about removing it, too. But it occured to me that v1 and v2
hardware can still have the sysfs entry to turn off parity check.

And since it's exposed in sysfs, I suppose there might be some init
scripts relying on it.

What do you think, Dmitry?
Shall I remove it?

Thanks,
jj

> >
> > Reviewed-by: Daniel Kurtz<djkurtz@...omium.org>
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thanks
> Wanlong Gao
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/