Re: [PATCH 0/5] Input: alps - cleanup

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:41:01PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 June 2016 13:27:30 Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Monday 20 June 2016 17:31:13 Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > Hi Pali,
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 01:23:56PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > > This patch series cleanup usage of alps_model_data table.
> > > > 
> > > > Pali Rohár (5):
> > > >   Input: alps - move ALPS_PROTO_V6 out of alps_model_data table
> > > >   Input: alps - move ALPS_PROTO_V4 out of alps_model_data table
> > > >   Input: alps - move ALPS_PROTO_V1 out of alps_model_data table
> > > >   Input: alps - warn about unsupported ALPS V9 touchpad
> > > >   Input: alps - cleanup ALPS_PROTO_V2 detection
> > > 
> > > Frankly, I do not quite like this series. The rule of thumb we had: if
> > > we can use e7 data to identify the device it should go into table,
> > > if we need to have more elaborate logic - then implement it in
> > > __alps_indentify(). I would understand if we got rid of the table
> > > completely, but we didn't.
> > 
> > Hans and me agreed that alps_model_data array is for old touchpads
> > defined as quirks table. So in this patch series I'm trying to eliminate
> > using that array. And it is possible for V1, V4 and V6 touchpads because
> > each protocol has only one entry in table. And last user is just V2
> > protocol which is I think better...
> > 
> > So this is my motivation for this patch series.
> 
> Any suggestion how to rework it? And any agreement if we should remove
> V1/V4/V6 from alps_model_date or let it stay here?

As I mentioned below I am happy with removing ALPS_PROTO_V4 and
subsequently command_mode_resp from alps_model_info, while leaving the
rest in the table.

Thanks.

> 
> > > I think the patch removing ALPS_PROTO_V4 and subsequent patch removing
> > > command_mode_resp from alps_model_info are good, the rest are not so
> > > much.
> > > 
> > > Thanks.
> > > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Pali Rohár
> pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx

-- 
Dmitry