Re: [v2] input: drv260x: Add TI drv260x haptics driver
From: Murphy, Dan
Date: Tue Jul 29 2014 - 09:42:12 EST
Thanks for the feedback
On 07/29/2014 07:09 AM, Michal Malý wrote:
> On Monday 28 of July 2014 21:21:26 Murphy, Dan wrote:
>> On 07/28/2014 12:59 PM, simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>>> The initial driver supports the devices
>>>>> real time playback mode. But the device
>>>>> has additional wave patterns in ROM.
>>>> As it presented the device appears to be a memoryless device, however
>>>> you present it to the rest of the system as if it can support playback
>>>> of multiple effects simultaneously, which is incorrect.
>>>> My guess that you need to engage the memoryless input library to schedule
>>>> handling multiple effects for your device, including ramping up, ramping
>>>> down, stopping playback when effects runs out, etc.
>>> Hi Dan,
>>> Elias and Michal (cc'ed) are working on a kernel/userland library to
>>> handle sending multiple force feedback signals to 'simple' devices,
>>> perhaps you should engage with them.
> Hi Dan,
> since I spent some time trying to improve the memoryless library I can
> hopefully provide you with some hints.
> If I'm reading this right, your device cannot play more than one effect at once
> but it can operate eihter in RTP mode where the user controls the operation of
> the motors directly on in an automated mode where the device follows some pre-
> programmed waveform. These two modes are mutually exclusive.
Actually there is one other mode here, that is the ability to program in a
waveform to be played. So that makes 3 modes I have to think about supporting.
I know there are products out there that would like to and do customize their feedback
based on certain user actions.
For the custom mode I could use the FF_CUSTOM id but not sure
how that fits into the Periodic structure. If I can get two out of 3 that would be
> If my understanding of the problem is correct, you will struggle both with
> memoryless library and your own imlementation. The memoryless library is quite
> simplistic and it doesn't have any sort of "passthrough" mode so you would not
> be able to do anything besides RTP that way.
> On the other hand if you decide to write your own implementation of effect
> handling you will end up duplicating a lot of code that already exists in the
> memoryless library and has been proven to work.
> A possible solution for the problem would be to separate the functions that
> control effect timing from the memoryless library and make them globally
> accessible. I believe that this would simplify any customized haptic
> implementation considerably and it might be a decent interim solution before
> the project Simon mentioned is ready.
How far are you on finishing the project?
If it is only a little bit out I can just keep with the memless RTP mode
as a start and then implement the other functions once the solution is accepted.
> If there is anybody interested in such a solution I can probably whip up a
> patch for it quite quickly.
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/