RE: Wacom USB driver patch
From: Ping Cheng
Date: Wed Feb 11 2004 - 14:51:39 EST
Nice catch, Pete. The Two "return"s should be replaced by "goto exit".
Vojtech, should I make another patch or you can handle it with my previous
one?
Thanks, both of you!
Ping
-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Zaitcev [mailto:zaitcev@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 11:05 AM
To: Ping Cheng
Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; vojtech@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Wacom USB driver patch
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:23:11 -0800
Ping Cheng <pingc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> <<linuxwacom.patch>>
This looks much better, it's not line-wrapped.
I have one question though, about this part:
@@ -152,15 +150,103 @@ static void wacom_pl_irq(struct urb *urb
+ /* was entered with stylus2 pressed */
+ if (wacom->tool[1] == BTN_TOOL_RUBBER && !(data[4] &
0x20) ) {
+ /* report out proximity for previous tool */
+ input_report_key(dev, wacom->tool[1], 0);
+ input_sync(dev);
+ wacom->tool[1] = BTN_TOOL_PEN;
+ return;
+ }
Is it safe to just return without resubmitting the urb here?
@@ -231,8 +317,12 @@ static void wacom_graphire_irq(struct ur
+ /* check if we can handle the data */
+ if (data[0] == 99)
+ return;
+
if (data[0] != 2)
Same here.
Also, please add the path to the patch, e.g. always use recursive diff.
-- Pete
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/