Re: Emulating level IRQs

2012-08-07 Thread Daniel Mack
On 06.08.2012 18:36, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 09:45:13AM +0800, Eric Miao wrote: > >> So my understanding, if it's correct, that we can treat the EETI chip as >> having >> two separate inputs: one IRQ line (for the event notification) and one GPIO >> line >> (for a condition w

Re: Emulating level IRQs

2012-08-06 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 09:45:13AM +0800, Eric Miao wrote: > So my understanding, if it's correct, that we can treat the EETI chip as > having > two separate inputs: one IRQ line (for the event notification) and one GPIO > line > (for a condition where data are emptied), we could naturally have

Re: Emulating level IRQs

2012-08-05 Thread Eric Miao
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Daniel Mack wrote: > On 05.08.2012 18:56, Haojian Zhuang wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 12:22 AM, Daniel Mack wrote: >>> On 24.07.2012 20:01, Daniel Mack wrote: On 23.07.2012 18:51, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 05:36:12PM +0200, Danie

Re: Emulating level IRQs

2012-08-05 Thread Daniel Mack
On 05.08.2012 18:56, Haojian Zhuang wrote: > On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 12:22 AM, Daniel Mack wrote: >> On 24.07.2012 20:01, Daniel Mack wrote: >>> On 23.07.2012 18:51, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 05:36:12PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: >>> > Ok, finally I found some time. In

Re: Emulating level IRQs

2012-08-05 Thread Haojian Zhuang
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 12:22 AM, Daniel Mack wrote: > On 24.07.2012 20:01, Daniel Mack wrote: >> On 23.07.2012 18:51, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 05:36:12PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: >> Ok, finally I found some time. In general, the patch works fine. The only detai

Re: Emulating level IRQs

2012-08-05 Thread Daniel Mack
On 24.07.2012 20:01, Daniel Mack wrote: > On 23.07.2012 18:51, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 05:36:12PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: > >>> Ok, finally I found some time. In general, the patch works fine. The >>> only detail I had to amend was the irqflags, which were changed from

Re: Emulating level IRQs (was: Re: [PATCH] Input: eeti_ts: Mark as CONFIG_BROKEN)

2012-07-24 Thread Mark Brown
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 08:01:56PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: > On 23.07.2012 18:51, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > Hmm, but that would mean we need to restore reading the data in open() > > to make sure we re-arm IRQ in case somebody touched the screen before it > > was opened by userspace... > I had

Emulating level IRQs (was: Re: [PATCH] Input: eeti_ts: Mark as CONFIG_BROKEN)

2012-07-24 Thread Daniel Mack
On 23.07.2012 18:51, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 05:36:12PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: >> Ok, finally I found some time. In general, the patch works fine. The >> only detail I had to amend was the irqflags, which were changed from >> IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING/IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING to