On Monday, 6 July 2015, at 9:44 pm, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> >> I think your patch is a good reduction, all in accord with what we talked
> >> about,
> >> but I have doubts that it will not create regressions. From what I have
> >> seen so
> >> far, patch-wise, the best solution is to leave the co
>> I think your patch is a good reduction, all in accord with what we talked
>> about,
>> but I have doubts that it will not create regressions. From what I have seen
>> so
>> far, patch-wise, the best solution is to leave the code as it is.
>
> So you believe that the current (in-tree) behavior
On Monday, 6 July 2015, at 9:11 pm, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> > It's been four weeks, and I haven't heard back on this patch. I believe I've
> > implemented what was requested. Is there a problem with it?
>
> I thought you did get response on this patch set, concerning the fabrication
> of
> force
Hi Matt,
> It's been four weeks, and I haven't heard back on this patch. I believe I've
> implemented what was requested. Is there a problem with it?
I thought you did get response on this patch set, concerning the fabrication of
force data? I seem to remember a mail from Dmitry about this, altho
It's been four weeks, and I haven't heard back on this patch. I believe I've
implemented what was requested. Is there a problem with it?
On Monday, 8 June 2015, at 9:07 pm, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> Now that input_mt_report_pointer_emulation() can synthesize ABS_TOOL_WIDTH
> from ABS_MT_WIDTH_MAJOR
Now that input_mt_report_pointer_emulation() can synthesize ABS_TOOL_WIDTH
from ABS_MT_WIDTH_MAJOR, the report_synaptics_data() function in bcm5974.c
is entirely redundant. This patch removes this function and introduces
reporting of ABS_MT_PRESSURE (faked from f->touch_major) to cause the
emulatio
