Re: [PATCH 04/14] HID: i2c-hid: implement ll_driver transport-layer callbacks

From: David Herrmann
Date: Wed Feb 12 2014 - 05:29:41 EST


Hi

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Benjamin Tissoires
<benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Add output_report and raw_request to i2c-hid.
> The current implementation of i2c_hid_output_raw_report decides
> by itself if it should use a direct send of the output report
> or use the data register (SET_REPORT). Split that by reimplement
> the logic in __i2c_hid_output_raw_report() which will be dropped
> soon.
>
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid.c b/drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid.c
> index f57de7f..07a054a 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid.c
> @@ -257,12 +257,21 @@ static int i2c_hid_get_report(struct i2c_client *client, u8 reportType,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int i2c_hid_set_report(struct i2c_client *client, u8 reportType,
> - u8 reportID, unsigned char *buf, size_t data_len)
> +/**
> + * i2c_hid_set_or_send_report: forward an incoming report to the device
> + * @client: the i2c_client of the device
> + * @reportType: 0x03 for HID_FEATURE_REPORT ; 0x02 for HID_OUTPUT_REPORT
> + * @reportID: the report ID
> + * @buf: the actual data to transfer, without the report ID
> + * @len: size of buf
> + * @use_data: true: use SET_REPORT HID command, false: send plain OUTPUT report
> + */
> +static int i2c_hid_set_or_send_report(struct i2c_client *client, u8 reportType,
> + u8 reportID, unsigned char *buf, size_t data_len, bool use_data)
> {
> struct i2c_hid *ihid = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> u8 *args = ihid->argsbuf;
> - const struct i2c_hid_cmd * hidcmd = &hid_set_report_cmd;
> + const struct i2c_hid_cmd *hidcmd;
> int ret;
> u16 dataRegister = le16_to_cpu(ihid->hdesc.wDataRegister);
> u16 outputRegister = le16_to_cpu(ihid->hdesc.wOutputRegister);
> @@ -279,6 +288,9 @@ static int i2c_hid_set_report(struct i2c_client *client, u8 reportType,
>
> i2c_hid_dbg(ihid, "%s\n", __func__);
>
> + if (!use_data && maxOutputLength == 0)
> + return -ENOSYS;
> +
> if (reportID >= 0x0F) {
> args[index++] = reportID;
> reportID = 0x0F;
> @@ -288,9 +300,10 @@ static int i2c_hid_set_report(struct i2c_client *client, u8 reportType,
> * use the data register for feature reports or if the device does not
> * support the output register
> */
> - if (reportType == 0x03 || maxOutputLength == 0) {
> + if (use_data) {
> args[index++] = dataRegister & 0xFF;
> args[index++] = dataRegister >> 8;
> + hidcmd = &hid_set_report_cmd;
> } else {
> args[index++] = outputRegister & 0xFF;
> args[index++] = outputRegister >> 8;
> @@ -559,7 +572,7 @@ static int i2c_hid_get_raw_report(struct hid_device *hid,
> }
>
> static int i2c_hid_output_raw_report(struct hid_device *hid, __u8 *buf,
> - size_t count, unsigned char report_type)
> + size_t count, unsigned char report_type, bool use_data)
> {
> struct i2c_client *client = hid->driver_data;
> int report_id = buf[0];
> @@ -573,9 +586,9 @@ static int i2c_hid_output_raw_report(struct hid_device *hid, __u8 *buf,
> count--;
> }
>
> - ret = i2c_hid_set_report(client,
> + ret = i2c_hid_set_or_send_report(client,
> report_type == HID_FEATURE_REPORT ? 0x03 : 0x02,
> - report_id, buf, count);
> + report_id, buf, count, use_data);
>
> if (report_id && ret >= 0)
> ret++; /* add report_id to the number of transfered bytes */
> @@ -583,6 +596,42 @@ static int i2c_hid_output_raw_report(struct hid_device *hid, __u8 *buf,
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int __i2c_hid_output_raw_report(struct hid_device *hid, __u8 *buf,
> + size_t count, unsigned char report_type)
> +{
> + struct i2c_client *client = hid->driver_data;
> + struct i2c_hid *ihid = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> + bool data = true; /* SET_REPORT */
> +
> + if (report_type == HID_OUTPUT_REPORT)
> + data = le16_to_cpu(ihid->hdesc.wMaxOutputLength) == 0;

Yepp, thanks for splitting that logic out of the report-handling,
makes it much easier to follow.

Reviewed-by: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@xxxxxxxxx>

Thanks
David

> +
> + return i2c_hid_output_raw_report(hid, buf, count, report_type, data);
> +}
> +
> +static int i2c_hid_output_report(struct hid_device *hid, __u8 *buf,
> + size_t count)
> +{
> + return i2c_hid_output_raw_report(hid, buf, count, HID_OUTPUT_REPORT,
> + false);
> +}
> +
> +static int i2c_hid_raw_request(struct hid_device *hid, unsigned char reportnum,
> + __u8 *buf, size_t len, unsigned char rtype,
> + int reqtype)
> +{
> + switch (reqtype) {
> + case HID_REQ_GET_REPORT:
> + return i2c_hid_get_raw_report(hid, reportnum, buf, len, rtype);
> + case HID_REQ_SET_REPORT:
> + if (buf[0] != reportnum)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + return i2c_hid_output_raw_report(hid, buf, len, rtype, true);
> + default:
> + return -EIO;
> + }
> +}
> +
> static void i2c_hid_request(struct hid_device *hid, struct hid_report *rep,
> int reqtype)
> {
> @@ -606,7 +655,7 @@ static void i2c_hid_request(struct hid_device *hid, struct hid_report *rep,
> break;
> case HID_REQ_SET_REPORT:
> hid_output_report(rep, buf);
> - i2c_hid_output_raw_report(hid, buf, len, rep->type);
> + i2c_hid_output_raw_report(hid, buf, len, rep->type, true);
> break;
> }
>
> @@ -769,6 +818,8 @@ static struct hid_ll_driver i2c_hid_ll_driver = {
> .close = i2c_hid_close,
> .power = i2c_hid_power,
> .request = i2c_hid_request,
> + .output_report = i2c_hid_output_report,
> + .raw_request = i2c_hid_raw_request,
> };
>
> static int i2c_hid_init_irq(struct i2c_client *client)
> @@ -1003,7 +1054,7 @@ static int i2c_hid_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>
> hid->driver_data = client;
> hid->ll_driver = &i2c_hid_ll_driver;
> - hid->hid_output_raw_report = i2c_hid_output_raw_report;
> + hid->hid_output_raw_report = __i2c_hid_output_raw_report;
> hid->dev.parent = &client->dev;
> ACPI_COMPANION_SET(&hid->dev, ACPI_COMPANION(&client->dev));
> hid->bus = BUS_I2C;
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
--
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/