Stef, I've finished testing the experimental code on my X1185 and it works well. It is much slower than the current backend - probably due to shading calculations during the scanner reads. This may be optimized. I know there is a double buffer copy that I put in that can probably be removed. So, I don't see anything that can't be worked around on the performance side.
The quality of the scans are much better with the experimental backend probably due to the shading, and the gain and offset calculations. Very nice! The code changes look good too. I do have a small concern about name space collision with the use of functions named "rts88xx_*", but they are only used in a single file and aren't exported so shouldn't be a problem. If they are moved into a separate file as indicated in the code they may have to be renamed... So, all in all I'd say the good outweighs the bad and we should move the experimental code into the main repository. I'd be interested to hear other opinions. regards, Fred Odendaal St?phane VOLTZ wrote: > Hello, > > the experimental lexmark backend is now quite in a good shape. It > brings > other the current backend: > - 2 new USB id support (Dell A920 and Lexmark X12xx models) > - add support for new X11xx models > - add arbitrary scan area selection > - offset and gain calibration > - software shading correction > > It has been tested on A920, X1200 in USB1.1 and newer X1100 model. Only > the > orignal model supported by the current backend should need some testing. > > So I'd like to know what everybody, and especially Fred, think about > moving > the experimental backend into regular CVS. > > Regards, > Stef > >
