RE: [PATCH v4 0/6] Touchscreen performance related fixes

2014-12-12 Thread Griffis, Brad
-Original Message- From: Catalin Crenguta [mailto:catalin.creng...@gmail.com] I have tried your patches by cloning [1] and copying the relevant files over the kernel I've cloned from [2]. It compiles runs, but I'm seeing lots of pen-down/pen-up events when I'm not touching the

RE: [PATCH v4 3/6] mfd: ti_am335x_tscadc: Remove unwanted reg_se_cache save

2014-11-21 Thread Griffis, Brad
-Original Message- From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com] On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 07:17:18PM +0100, Johannes Pointner wrote: Before the patches were also jumps but I thought it is something Vignesh should know. Maybe there is some fix for that too? I believe

RE: [PATCH v4 3/6] mfd: ti_am335x_tscadc: Remove unwanted reg_se_cache save

2014-11-20 Thread Griffis, Brad
-Original Message- From: Nori, Sekhar Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 7:56 AM I also tested this series on AM335x EVM using the v3.18-rc5 kernel. Again, no breakage but no improvement as well. The primary goal was not necessarily to improve performance of the touchscreen itself.

RE: [PATCH 0/4] Touchscreen performance related fixes

2014-10-27 Thread Griffis, Brad
On 10/27/2014 12:34 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: Do we really need #3 (and then #4)? Given the complexity we have already, is there any benefit by decreasing this value? I specifically requested we add ti,charge-delay to the device tree because it is THE critical value to tune for a