| Message ID | 20240525193854.39130-1-hdegoede@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Input: silead - Always support 10 fingers | expand |
On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 09:38:52PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi all, > > The first patch in this series stops making the maximum number of supported > fingers in silead_ts configurable, replacing this with simply hardcoding it > to 10. > > The main reason for doing so is to avoid the need to have a boiler-plate > "silead,max-fingers=10" property in each silead touchscreen config. > The second patch removes this boilerplate from all silead touchscreen > configs in touchscreen_dmi.c . > > Dmitry, since touchscreen_dmi.c sees regular updates I believe it is > best to merge the 2 patches separately. As long as I know that patch 1/2 > is queued for merging for say 6.11 then I can merge patch 2/2 independently > for the same cycle. Why don't you merge both of them with my ack for the silead.c? Thanks.
Hi, On 5/26/24 6:19 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 09:38:52PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> The first patch in this series stops making the maximum number of supported >> fingers in silead_ts configurable, replacing this with simply hardcoding it >> to 10. >> >> The main reason for doing so is to avoid the need to have a boiler-plate >> "silead,max-fingers=10" property in each silead touchscreen config. >> The second patch removes this boilerplate from all silead touchscreen >> configs in touchscreen_dmi.c . >> >> Dmitry, since touchscreen_dmi.c sees regular updates I believe it is >> best to merge the 2 patches separately. As long as I know that patch 1/2 >> is queued for merging for say 6.11 then I can merge patch 2/2 independently >> for the same cycle. > > Why don't you merge both of them with my ack for the silead.c? That works for me too, thanks. One challenge here is that I typically send out new touchscreen_dmi entries as fixes. Are you ok with merging the silead change as a fix too ? Regards, Hans
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 09:46:54AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 5/26/24 6:19 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 09:38:52PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> The first patch in this series stops making the maximum number of supported > >> fingers in silead_ts configurable, replacing this with simply hardcoding it > >> to 10. > >> > >> The main reason for doing so is to avoid the need to have a boiler-plate > >> "silead,max-fingers=10" property in each silead touchscreen config. > >> The second patch removes this boilerplate from all silead touchscreen > >> configs in touchscreen_dmi.c . > >> > >> Dmitry, since touchscreen_dmi.c sees regular updates I believe it is > >> best to merge the 2 patches separately. As long as I know that patch 1/2 > >> is queued for merging for say 6.11 then I can merge patch 2/2 independently > >> for the same cycle. > > > > Why don't you merge both of them with my ack for the silead.c? > > That works for me too, thanks. > > One challenge here is that I typically send out new touchscreen_dmi > entries as fixes. Are you ok with merging the silead change as a fix > too ? Sorry, I am not sure what you mean here. Do you mean you do not want to wait for the next merge window and send it earlier? If so I'm fine with it. Thanks.
Hi, On 5/31/24 1:54 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 09:46:54AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 5/26/24 6:19 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 09:38:52PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> The first patch in this series stops making the maximum number of supported >>>> fingers in silead_ts configurable, replacing this with simply hardcoding it >>>> to 10. >>>> >>>> The main reason for doing so is to avoid the need to have a boiler-plate >>>> "silead,max-fingers=10" property in each silead touchscreen config. >>>> The second patch removes this boilerplate from all silead touchscreen >>>> configs in touchscreen_dmi.c . >>>> >>>> Dmitry, since touchscreen_dmi.c sees regular updates I believe it is >>>> best to merge the 2 patches separately. As long as I know that patch 1/2 >>>> is queued for merging for say 6.11 then I can merge patch 2/2 independently >>>> for the same cycle. >>> >>> Why don't you merge both of them with my ack for the silead.c? >> >> That works for me too, thanks. >> >> One challenge here is that I typically send out new touchscreen_dmi >> entries as fixes. Are you ok with merging the silead change as a fix >> too ? > > Sorry, I am not sure what you mean here. Do you mean you do not want to > wait for the next merge window and send it earlier? Yes that is what I meant, sorry for not being clear. > If so I'm fine with it. Thank you. Regards, Hans