[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RPC] OLPC tablet input driver.
    On 8/29/06, Zephaniah E. Hull <> wrote:
    > On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:53:17AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
    > > Hi,
    > >
    > > On 8/29/06, Zephaniah E. Hull <> wrote:
    > > >The OLPC will ship with a somewhat unique input device made by ALPS,
    > > >connected via PS/2 and speaking a protocol only loosely based on that
    > > >spoken by other ALPS devices.
    > > >
    > >
    > > Do you have a formal programming spec for it?
    > Not that I can currently distribute.
    > Converting to html, trimming out hardware detail, and feeding it through
    > channels for ALPS to say that they are comfortable with the amount of
    > data being released is on my todo list, but behind a few other things.

    I see. Well, if you have a decent contacts in ALPS could you ask them
    if they could release any information on their other hardware?

    > >
    > > >4: Technical/policy: Buttons are currently sent to both of the input
    > > >devices we generate, I don't see any way to avoid this that is not a
    > > >policy decision on which buttons belong to which device, but I'm open to
    > > >suggestions.
    > > >
    > >
    > > Is it not known how actual hardware wired?
    > Hardware is wired with one device, which is quite wide. The entire
    > width can be accessed via the PT sensor, and the middle 1/3rd with the
    > GS sensor.
    > I believe that the buttons will be one on each side, though I'm not
    > positive, and the PT data, the GS data, and the button data all arrive
    > in the same packet.
    > So really there is no 'right' way from the kernel driver's point of
    > view, the buttons belong equally to both.
    > The kernel driver that this will be matched with will probably leave it
    > as a user configuration setting as to which one it will throw button
    > presses away for.


    > > >+ dev2->name = "OLPC OLPC GlideSensor";
    > >
    > > "OLPC OLPC"?
    > To match the first one, with a protocol name of OLPC and a vendor of
    > OLPC we end up with 'OLPC OLPC' for the first one, this is, IMHO, rather
    > suboptimal, but I'm not sure what else to do here.

    Should not vendor be still ALPS?

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-08-29 17:17    [W:0.023 / U:12.924 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site