lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jan]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] Staging:IIO: New ABI
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 04:31:12PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 04:14:15PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:47:18PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 04:53:21PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > > I am not aware of these. Could you direct me to the current api? Also note that these
> > > > aren't the actual alarms, merely a means of enabling the relevant event on the related
> > > > event character device.
> > >
> > > Hm, I thought we had an accelerator interface somewhere...
> > >
> >
> > Nope. And I am also interested in this since I am sittign on a bunch of
> > accelerometers, magnetometers, etc drivers that are trying to plug into
> > input sysbsystem and quite unsure what to do with them.
> >
> > It was OK whch HDAPS and friends when they were using input for
> > secondary, toyish purposes, but these new drivers trying to use input
> > devnts as primary API and I am unsure if it is the best solution.
> > Accelerometer might be used as an input device but not always an input
> > device.
>
> Yeah, I see it using a joystick interface, which might be acceptable for
> "toy" devices like you say.
>
> But for "real" ones, we should do something else.
>
> Maybe, for devices that are going to be used by x.org, like the "toy"
> ones, we stick with the current input interface, but for others, we use
> a "real" interface, probably through hwmon, so that users can get the
> real data out in a consistant manner.
>

I'd rather have all of them use real interface and then have a bridge
to input module to enable toyish mode (unless the device in question
is really truly an input device).

--
Dmitry


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-01-26 10:37    [W:0.063 / U:1.868 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site