linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] input/touchscreen: imagis: add support for IST3032C

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Sat, 9 Dec 2023 22:50:52 +0200
From:   Markuss Broks <markuss.broks@...il.com>
To:     Karel Balej <karelb@...li.ms.mff.cuni.cz>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...math.org>,
        linux-input@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Duje Mihanović <duje.mihanovic@...le.hr>,
        ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        Karel Balej <balejk@...fyz.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] input/touchscreen: imagis: add support for
 IST3032C

Hi Karel,

On 12/8/23 23:59, Karel Balej wrote:
> Markuss,
>
> thank you for the review.
>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/imagis.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/imagis.c
>>> index 84a02672ac47..41f28e6e9cb1 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/imagis.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/imagis.c
>>> @@ -35,6 +35,8 @@
>>>    #define IST3038B_REG_CHIPID		0x30
>>>    #define IST3038B_WHOAMI			0x30380b
>>>    
>>> +#define IST3032C_WHOAMI			0x32c
>>> +
>> Perhaps it should be ordered in alphabetic/alphanumeric order,
>> alternatively, the chip ID values could be grouped.
> Here I followed suit and just started a new section for the new chip,
> except there is only one entry. I do agree that it would be better to
> sort the chips alphanumerically and I am actually surprised that I
> didn't do that - but now I see that the chips that you added are not
> sorted either, so it might be because of that.
>
> I propose to definitely swap the order of the sections, putting 32C
> first, then 38B and 38C at the end (from top to bottom). The chip ID
> values could then still be grouped in a new section, but I think I would
> actually prefer to keep them as parts of the respective sections as it
> is now, although it is in no way a strong preference.
We could do that, yeah. It is not a problem right now since there's only 
3 models supported, but it would maker sense and set some order for when 
we'd have more supported devices.
>
> Please let me know whether you agree with this or have a different
> preference. And if the former, please confirm that I can add your
> Reviewed-by trailer to the patch modified in such a way.
Yeah, it's fine.
>
> Best regards,
> K. B.

- Markuss