Re: [RFC PATCH 05/06] input/rmi4: F01 - device control

[Christopher Heiny]

On 11/27/2012 01:29 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 02:31:27PM -0800, Christopher Heiny wrote:
> > >On 11/26/2012 01:40 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > > >Hi Christopher,
> > > > >
> > > > >On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 07:58:53PM -0800, Christopher Heiny wrote:
> > > > > >>RMI Function 01 implements basic device control and power management
> > > > > >>behaviors for the RMI4 sensor.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>rmi_f01.h exports definitions that we expect to be used by other functionality
> > > > > >>in the future (such as firmware reflash).
> > > > >
> > > > >Please see my comments below.
> > >
> > >Hi Dmitry,
> > >
> > >Thanks for the feedback and the patch.  I've got just one question,
> > >included below, with a bunch of snipping).
> > >
> > >				Chris
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Signed-off-by: Christopher Heiny<cheiny@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Cc: Dmitry Torokhov<dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>Cc: Linus Walleij<linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>Cc: Naveen Kumar Gaddipati<naveen.gaddipati@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>Cc: Joeri de Gram<j.de.gram@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>---
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>  drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.c | 1348 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > >>  drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.h |  160 +++++
> > > > > >>  2 files changed, 1508 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.c b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.c
> > > > > >>new file mode 100644
> > > > > >>index 0000000..038266c
> > > > > >>--- /dev/null
> > > > > >>+++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.c
> > > > > >>@@ -0,0 +1,1348 @@
> > > > > >>+/*
> > > > > >>+ * Copyright (c) 2011-2012 Synaptics Incorporated
> > > > > >>+ * Copyright (c) 2011 Unixphere
> > > > > >>+ *
> > > > > >>+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > > > > >>+ * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> > > > > >>+ * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> > > > > >>+ * (at your option) any later version.
> > >
> > >[snip]
> > >
> > > > > >>+/**
> > > > > >>+ * @reset - set this bit to force a firmware reset of the sensor.
> > > > > >>+ */
> > > > > >>+struct f01_device_commands {
> > > > > >>+	bool reset:1;
> > > > > >>+	u8 reserved:7;
> > > > >
> > > > >When specifying bitwise fields please use u8, u16, etc only.
> > >
> > >Um, OK.  Previously patch feedback suggested to use bool instead of
> > >u8 for single bit fields (see here:
> > >http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-input/msg22198.html).  So I'm a
> > >little confused.  It's no big deal to change it back, but I'd like
> > >confirmation that it is really what we should do.
>
> I believe that it is better to specify exact bitness of the base type of
> the bitfield so you do not surprised by the alignment.

OK, thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/