On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 12:45 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
quoted text
> The patch was pretty good, I did not quite like the driver
> registration code so I tried to clean it up.

Cool, cheers.

quoted text
> What do you think about
> the attached patch (not tested due to the lack of hardware). If you
> are OK with it please add your signed-off-by because version of the
> patch I grabbed did not have it.

Attached patch looks good - I can't test it until next week, but looks
logically correct to me. I would also like to add the oddball proc event
notification system to the removal-schedule document, but this can be a
fight for another day.

quoted text
> > > Also I don't think you want to use
> > > KEY_BREAK. What is the expected function of that key?

To lock the screen. We probably want to replace HCI_HKEY_BREAK with
HCI_HKEY_LOCK, as the picture on the keys is a little padlock.

quoted text
> > It's a "lock" key, I really want KEY_LOCK added to input.h, but that
> > might prove difficult. For now I've used KEY_CLEAR, yell if you think
> > there's a better one to substitute or if you guys want me to add get a
> > constant added to input.h.
> 
> Iam still struggling with the purpose of the key. What would you
> extect to happen when youser presses this key? Screen gets locked?
> KEY_SCREENLOCK? KEY_SCREENSAVER?

Either of these keys would be good to add.

So yes, patch looks good, cheers for the improvements.

Signed-off-by: Richard Hughes <richard@hughsie.com>

Thanks again,

Richard.


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