[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170917175013.GB13003@amd>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 19:50:14 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>
Cc: linux-input@...r.kernel.org, David Lin <dtwlin@...gle.com>,
corbet@....net, rpurdie@...ys.net, hdegoede@...hat.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, robh@...nel.org, romlem@...gle.com,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-leds@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Vibrations in input vs. LED was Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] led:
ledtrig-transient: add support for hrtimer
Hi!
> >> Do you think such an improvement could be harmful in some way,
> >> even if it was made optional?
> >
> > Of course, we can make LED timing accurate down to microseconds. It will
> > mean increased overhead -- for "improvement" human can not perceive.
> >
> > If someone has problems with LED delays not being accurate enough... we
> > may want to fix it. But that is not the case here, is it?
>
> AFAIR David was mentioning that the hr_timer support is perceivable
He said that hr_timer support is perceivable _when he is driving
vibration motor_. Which he should not do in the first place.
Yes, if the difference is perceivable with LED in non-crazy
configuration (*), we can take the patch. Is it? Do we have someone
not from Google observing it?
Pavel
(*) emulating PWM using blink trigger counts as "crazy" :-)
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists