Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Jan 2015 21:24:01 +0100 | From | Henrik Rydberg <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Input: MT - Add support for balanced slot assignment |
| |
Hi Dmitry,
On 01/22/2015 09:02 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 08:52:25PM +0100, Henrik Rydberg wrote: >> int input_mt_assign_slots(struct input_dev *dev, int *slots, >> - const struct input_mt_pos *pos, int num_pos) >> + const struct input_mt_pos *pos, int num_pos, >> + int dmax) > > Should dmax be unsigned and do we really need to treat 0 specially or we > could use UNIT_MAX as "don't care" value?
We could have dmax unsigned, but it does not have to be from a branching perspective, since the square is what gets used anyways.
>> { >> struct input_mt *mt = dev->mt; >> + int mu = 2 * dmax * dmax; > > For my education, what does "mu" stand for?
I chose mu because of the mathematical similarity to the chemical potential in statistical mechanics, where it denotes the energy per particle. Here, it denotes the energy per contact assignment.
> Ideally, if someone could create a > write-up on the contact matching that would be most awesome.
Heh, I guess I will have to write something at some point, without requiring prior knowledge of Lagrange relaxation or the like. Time is a luxury these days...
Henrik
| |