[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87obzlu40p.fsf@emc.com.tw>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:47:18 +0800
From: JJ Ding <jj_ding@....com.tw>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc: linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>,
Aaron Huang <aaron_huang@....com.tw>,
Tom Lin <tom_lin@....com.tw>,
Eric Piel <E.A.B.Piel@...elft.nl>,
Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@...omium.org>,
Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@...onical.com>,
Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...omail.se>,
Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...l.unipv.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] Input: elantech - use firmware provided x, y ranges
Hi Dmitry,
Sorry for late reply. I missed this one somehow.
On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 00:47:56 -0700, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 09:57:05AM +0800, JJ Ding wrote:
> > +
> > + i = (etd->fw_version > 0x020800 &&
> > + etd->fw_version < 0x020900) ? 1 : 2;
> > + *x_max = (etd->capabilities[1] - i) * 64;
> > + *y_max = (etd->capabilities[2] - i) * 64;
> > + *y_2ft_max = (*y_max - i) * 64 / 4;
>
> Hmm, we should have the same range for ST and MT data and scale MT data
> if it has lower resolution to match ST.
So I should just remove y_2ft_max and those ETP_2FT_XXXX in elantech.h,
and do the scale in elantech_report_absolute_v2?
If so, I will create another patch for this change.
Is this OK with you?
Thanks.
jj
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Dmitry
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists