linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] HID: i2c-hid: Introduce goodix-i2c-hid as a subclass of i2c-hid

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <CAD=FV=XUVLqS2kSjJSdPTpZbDdFX4cXOrqS1x3oxGFsOcbXEow@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Nov 2020 08:10:15 -0800
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc:     Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
        Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        "open list:HID CORE LAYER" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        Andrea Borgia <andrea@...gia.bo.it>,
        Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] HID: i2c-hid: Introduce goodix-i2c-hid as a
 subclass of i2c-hid

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 4:09 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 11/4/20 2:29 AM, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > Goodix i2c-hid touchscreens are mostly i2c-hid compliant but have some
> > special power sequencing requirements, including the need to drive a
> > reset line during the sequencing.
> >
> > Let's use the new ability of i2c-hid to have subclasses for power
> > sequencing to support the first Goodix i2c-hid touchscreen: GT7375P
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes in v4:
> > - Totally redid based on the new subclass system.
>
> Again just my 2 cents, but I'm not sure if this should be an
> entirely separate driver, or just something added to the
> generic drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid-of.c code.
>
> I have no real preference either way, just asking the
> question to make sure both options are considered.

Yeah, I thought about it.  ...but at the moment I'm not convinced it's
really any cleaner and I think there's very little shared code.  In
the goodix case, I don't want to specify the extra regulator or the
timings or even the hid descriptor address.  In the non-goodix case I
don't want the goodix properties.  It also sounded as if Benjamin's
preferred solutions involved having two separate files.  I'll wait for
Benjamin's feedback here, though, and if he wants me to combine them
then I'll give it a shot for v5.

-Doug

-Doug