Re: [PATCH] input: Introduce light-weight contact tracking

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Henrik Rydberg
Date: Thursday, November 11, 2010 - 3:53 am

On 11/11/2010 06:15 AM, Rafi Rubin wrote:



The main goal of my patch is to device a simple, stable, parameter-free matching
function that can be used in interrupt context. If you have such a function,
about a hundred lines of code, completes in a couple of hundred cycles, tested
and benchmarked in the mtdev framework, and which can do six fingers, I would be
happy to use that instead. Otherwise, I suggest we focus on this patch.



The N-trig device is the only device in the kernel that requires special ghost
filtering. All other devices send reliable data, and either have fewer contacts,
handle their own tracking, or send all data to userspace. Future devices will
most likely have tracking capabilities, and even if they do not, protocol A and
mtdev handles that case. Thus, the question is really whether a new device would
produce unreliable contact data. I find that unlikely.




Second-order methods for a device that does not even produce zeroth-order
contact data? As far as I know, the first-order tracking in mtdev has not
disappointed anyone yet, so your statement seems to need elaboration.

Henrik
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] input: Introduce light-weight contact tracking, Henrik Rydberg, (Sun Nov 7, 1:18 pm)
Re: [PATCH] input: Introduce light-weight contact tracking, Henrik Rydberg, (Mon Nov 8, 12:07 pm)
Re: [PATCH] input: Introduce light-weight contact tracking, Henrik Rydberg, (Thu Nov 11, 3:53 am)
Re: [PATCH] input: Introduce light-weight contact tracking, Dmitry Torokhov, (Thu Nov 11, 1:00 pm)