[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] More i8042-reset quirks for MSI Wind-clone netbooks
    On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 11:42:50PM +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote:
    > On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 08:08:09AM +0800, Li, Yan wrote:
    > > That's true. But we are not sure how many regressions we'll meet and
    > > whether the efforts devoted to handle them is worthy. (How to handle
    > > regressions? Perhaps, ironically, we'll need another 'whitelist' for
    > > them!)
    > If we hit regressions then it's the wrong fix and would have to be
    > reverted.

    Still, I don't think we have enough reason to enable multi-reset of
    i8042 for all machines: the old code (sane and following specs) has
    been working well since long ago for most machines, and not until
    recently we have seen special cases, no more than half a dozen
    machines that needs special treating. These few glitches can't
    justify a global move.

    Without a good reason, your move (try and revert if hit regressions)
    seems to be the trial-and-error approach, and not very good for the
    stable release (though perfectly safe for some testing branches).

    > Better a small blacklist than a large whitelist (though, in
    > the general case, the presence of either is an indication of a bug)

    We have no way to know which one is smaller one, the current list is
    very small (5 entries). I'll change my mind if this
    i8042_dmi_reset_table[] keeps growing.

    The presence of {black,white}list (or more generally, quirks) is the
    software reflection of the complexity of the world, not necessarily a
    bug. They are popular (if not ubiquitous) among the kernel.

    > > Does this matter? Does whether Windows fail or not affect our
    > > decision here? (Worse that I have no "stock Windows XP" for
    > > testing. All I have are those companion Windows Recovery CDs that
    > > include all drivers).
    > Yes. If Windows works without hardware specific drivers then there's a
    > flaw in our i8042 setup code that's affecting an unknown number of
    > machines, and adding more entries to a static table tells us nothing
    > about what proportion of those machines are now fixed - it just tells us
    > that we've worked around the issue for the ones that Intel happen to be
    > testing.

    Not necessarily if we had followed the spec (I'm not sure of this) of
    using i8042.

    Hope someone can help us do this test. I have already found loads of
    touchpad drivers on net so I guess Windows can't drive a touchpad
    until a driver is installed. Pure guess.

    Best regards,
    Li, Yan

    Moblin Team, Opensource Technology Center, SSG, Intel
    Office tel.: +86-10-82171695 (inet: 8-758-1695)
    OpenPGP key: 5C6C31EF
    IRC: yanli on network

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-06-19 09:19    [W:0.025 / U:1.232 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site