On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 11:02:17AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 04/09/2014 10:09 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 07:29:26PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 11:24:34AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > >> > >>> Do we need all IDs? I'd expect we only interested in HID, not CIDs? > >> > >> I think HID handles the cases we've seen so far, but we could imagine a > >> system vendor providing their own HID, a trackpad vendor's CID and then > >> the generic mouse CID. It seems better to err on the side of including > >> them. > > > > OK, fair enough. Another question - do we want to prefix IDs with "PNP:" > > prefix so that if we add device tree in the future we'll know what kind > > of IDs we are dealing with? > > I'm a bit divided on this, adding a "PNP: " prefix will make it a bit harder > to parse, OTOH once we will have other users like devicetree knowing where > the info comes from will be very useful. To me in the end the latter argument > wins. Let me know if you agree and I'll do a v3 adding the PNP: prefix.
Yes please. -- Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
