[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2074509.XlRZ7oGjqX@linux-lqwf.site>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 22:10:15 +0200
From: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.de>
To: Yann Cantin <yann.cantin@...oste.net>
Cc: linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jikos@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [eBeam PATCH 2/2] input: misc: New USB eBeam input driver.
On Wednesday 05 September 2012 21:58:06 Yann Cantin wrote:
> As ebeams are the only devices to my knowledge that work that way, i don't think
> a common API can be common, unless we mean an in-kernel generic purpose calibration
> API for input devices (stellar away for me), or a userland one (where should it be
> in the stack ?). Sincerely, this look overkill.
>
> In the other hand, the actual ebeam module transformation feeding events subsys
> works very well and expose straight and usable data to userland (xorg evdev for now,
> and any program that can eat kernel's input data).
OK, I see the problem. You have no other choice.
> ##
>
> I understand the sysfs interface is a problem. Eventually, in last resort, i can reduce
> it to 4 files : pass the 9 matrix parameters as one big string, removing min values. But
> i think this obfuscate the api for a marginal gain.
That would be wrong. The problem is a specific API. If it needs to be done
at all, it better be done as cleanly as possible.
Regards
Oliver
--
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