| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5440F282.8040306@itdev.co.uk> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 11:42:10 +0100 From: Nick Dyer <nick.dyer@...ev.co.uk> To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> CC: "linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Touch processing on host CPU Hi- I'm trying to find out which subsystem maintainer I should be talking to - apologies if I'm addressing the wrong people. There is a model for doing touch processing where the touch controller becomes a much simpler device which sends out raw acquisitions (over SPI at up to 1Mbps + protocol overheads). All touch processing is then done in user space by the host CPU. An example of this is NVIDIA DirectTouch - see: http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2012/02/24/industry-adopts-nvidia-directtouch/ In the spirit of "upstream first", I'm trying to figure out how to get a driver accepted. Obviously it's not an input device in the normal sense. Is it acceptable just to send the raw touch data out via a char device? Is there another subsystem which is a good match (eg IIO)? Does the protocol (there is ancillary/control data as well) need to be documented? cheers -- Nick Dyer Senior Software Engineer, ITDev Fully Managed Technology Design Services +44 (0)23 80988855 - http://www.itdev.co.uk -- 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