lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 07/14] HID: input: hid-input remove hid_output_raw_report call
From
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 5:35 AM, David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Benjamin Tissoires
> <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com> wrote:
>> hid_output_raw_report() is not a ll_driver callback and should not be used.
>> To keep the same code path than before, we are forced to play with the
>> different hid_hw_* calls: if the usb or i2c device does not support
>> direct output reports, then we will rely on the SET_REPORT HID call.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/hid/hid-input.c | 10 +++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-input.c b/drivers/hid/hid-input.c
>> index eb00a5b..6b7bdca 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-input.c
>> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-input.c
>> @@ -1153,7 +1153,7 @@ static void hidinput_led_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> led_work);
>> struct hid_field *field;
>> struct hid_report *report;
>> - int len;
>> + int len, ret;
>> __u8 *buf;
>>
>> field = hidinput_get_led_field(hid);
>> @@ -1187,7 +1187,10 @@ static void hidinput_led_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>>
>> hid_output_report(report, buf);
>> /* synchronous output report */
>> - hid_output_raw_report(hid, buf, len, HID_OUTPUT_REPORT);
>> + ret = hid_hw_output_report(hid, buf, len);
>> + if (ret == -ENOSYS)
>> + hid_hw_raw_request(hid, buf[0], buf, len, HID_OUTPUT_REPORT,
>> + HID_REQ_SET_REPORT);
>
> Does HID core always set the report-id in buf[0]? Even if none are
> used? I know the incoming data may lack the report-id, but I always
> thought we do the same for outgoing if it's implicit?

oh, yes, you are right. The HID spec says: "The meaning of the request
fields for the Set_Report request is the same as for the Get_Report
request, however the data direction is reversed and the Report Data is
sent from host to device. "

So this is wrong... We should use (report->id) instead of buf[0].

Will fix in v2.

>
> I also already see devices with broken OUTPUT_REPORTs.. I guess at
> some point we have to introduce a quirk-flag to choose between both
> calls. But lets wait for that to happen, maybe we're lucky.
>
>> kfree(buf);
>> }
>>
>> @@ -1266,7 +1269,8 @@ static struct hid_input *hidinput_allocate(struct hid_device *hid)
>> }
>>
>> input_set_drvdata(input_dev, hid);
>> - if (hid->ll_driver->request || hid->hid_output_raw_report)
>> + if (hid->ll_driver->request || hid->ll_driver->output_report ||
>> + hid->ll_driver->raw_request)
>
> Isn't raw_request mandatory? So we could remove that whole if() thing here.

Currently, it's not (see hid_hw_raw_request). However, all the
upstream hid transport drivers implement it.

We can make it mandatory, but we should check it while adding the
device in hid_add_device.

will do for v2 too.

Cheers,
Benjamin

>
> Thanks
> David
>
>> input_dev->event = hidinput_input_event;
>> input_dev->open = hidinput_open;
>> input_dev->close = hidinput_close;
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
>>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-13 17:21    [W:0.250 / U:0.144 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site