From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755689Ab0EWXqi (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 23 May 2010 19:46:38 -0400
Received: from xenotime.net ([72.52.115.56]:55604 "HELO xenotime.net"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP
	id S1755618Ab0EWXqh (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 23 May 2010 19:46:37 -0400
Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 16:46:34 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>
To: Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@euromail.se>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-input@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@nokia.com>,
       Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>,
       Benjamin Tissoires <tissoire@cena.fr>, Stephane Chatty <chatty@enac.fr>,
       Rafi Rubin <rafi@seas.upenn.edu>, Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] input: mt: Document the MT event slot protocol
 (rev4)
Message-Id: <20100523164634.ce95fb93.rdunlap@xenotime.net>
In-Reply-To: <4BF9ABC7.9090208@euromail.se>
References: <1274567437-2818-1-git-send-email-rydberg@euromail.se>
	<1274567437-2818-2-git-send-email-rydberg@euromail.se>
	<20100523102413.2fee3f4c.rdunlap@xenotime.net>
	<4BF9ABC7.9090208@euromail.se>
Organization: YPO4
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (GTK+ 2.16.6; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 24 May 2010 00:27:19 +0200 Henrik Rydberg wrote:

> Randy Dunlap wrote:
> [...]
> >> +Protocol Usage
> >> +--------------
> >> +
> >> +Contact details are sent sequentially as separate packets of ABS_MT
> >> +events. Only the ABS_MT events are recognized as part of a contact
> >> +packet. Since these events are ignored by current single-touch (ST)
> >> +applications, the MT protocol can be implemented on top of the ST protocol
> >> +in an existing driver.
> >> +
> >> +Drivers for type A devices mark the end of a packet by calling the
> > 
> > end?
> > 
> >> +input_mt_sync() function, which generates a SYN_MT_REPORT event. This
> >> +instructs the receiver to accept the data for the current contact and
> >> +prepare to receive another. Drivers for type B devices mark the beginning
> > 
> > vs. beginning?  Seems incongruous.  And not just to the doc, but to
> > producers and consumers as well.
> 
> Perhaps this modification makes it clearer?
> 
> Drivers for type A devices separate contact packets by calling
> input_mt_sync() at the end of each packet. This generates a SYN_MT_REPORT
> event, which instructs the receiver to accept the data for the current
> contact and prepare to receive another.
> 
> Drivers for type B devices separate contact packets by calling
> input_mt_slot(), with a slot as argument, at the beginning of each packet.
> This generates an ABS_MT_SLOT event, which instructs the receiver to
> prepare for updates of the given slot.

Yes, that sounds good to me.

> >> +of a packet by calling the input_mt_slot() function with a slot as
> >> +argument, which generates an ABS_MT_SLOT event. This instructs the receiver
> >> +to prepare for updates of the given slot.
> >> +
> >> +The end of a multi-touch transfer is marked by calling the usual
> > 
> > The end method is done for Types A and B, right?
> 
> How about this line instead?
> 
> All drivers mark the end of a multi-touch transfer by calling the usual

Yes, good.


thanks.
---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***