Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760539AbZFQBCD (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2009 21:02:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758431AbZFQBBy (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2009 21:01:54 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:41634 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751969AbZFQBBx (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2009 21:01:53 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.42,233,1243839600"; d="scan'208";a="700028688" Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 09:01:40 +0800 From: "Li, Yan I" To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Alan Cox , "linux-input@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "greg@kroah.com" , yanli@infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] More i8042-reset quirks for MSI Wind-clone netbooks Message-ID: <20090617010138.GA13479@thyme.bj.intel.com> Mail-Followup-To: Matthew Garrett , Alan Cox , "linux-input@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "greg@kroah.com" , yanli@infradead.org References: <20090615141613.GA7876@sage.bj.intel.com> <20090615143446.GB19451@srcf.ucam.org> <20090615144748.GA25734@thyme.bj.intel.com> <20090616154200.GA12715@srcf.ucam.org> <20090616173618.353901ee@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090616164351.GA14353@srcf.ucam.org> <20090616181549.496ae0f2@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090616171732.GA14912@srcf.ucam.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090616171732.GA14912@srcf.ucam.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1362 Lines: 35 On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 01:17:32AM +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote: > So the touchpad on these machines doesn't work with generic Windows? I'm > interested in the specifics, not general issues with i8042 > implementations. We've repeatedly seen that these quirk tables end up > inadequately comprehensive and in several cases have masked the actual > problem. Now we have more than 99% machines work well with current i8042 code path, and less than 1% of machines (those MSI Wind & clones) that don't work unless being added to this list. If we do multiple-resetting unconditionally (for all machines), we are effectively: 1. fixing things that works well 2. make >99% machines (the good citizens) untested This seems a change too aggressive for me. Do we have a good reason for taking this risk? Of course if we found the "actual problem" we'd conjure up a better fix. But before that, I'd prefer the conservative way. -- Best regards, Li, Yan Moblin Team, Opensource Technology Center, SSG, Intel Office tel.: +86-10-82171695 (inet: 8-758-1695) OpenPGP key: 5C6C31EF IRC: yanli on network irc.freenode.net -- 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/