Re: [PATCH 13/17] HID: logitech-hidpp: make .probe usbhid capable

2017-01-19 Thread Benjamin Tissoires
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jan 2017, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > >> > The current custom solution for the G920 is not the best because >> > hid_hw_start() is not called at the end of the .probe(). >> > It means that any configuration

Re: [PATCH 13/17] HID: logitech-hidpp: make .probe usbhid capable

2017-01-19 Thread Benjamin Tissoires
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jan 2017, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > >> > The current custom solution for the G920 is not the best because >> > hid_hw_start() is not called at the end of the .probe(). >> > It means that any configuration retrieved after the

Re: [PATCH 13/17] HID: logitech-hidpp: make .probe usbhid capable

2017-01-19 Thread Jiri Kosina
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > The current custom solution for the G920 is not the best because > > hid_hw_start() is not called at the end of the .probe(). > > It means that any configuration retrieved after the initial hid_hw_start > > would not be exposed to user space

Re: [PATCH 13/17] HID: logitech-hidpp: make .probe usbhid capable

2017-01-19 Thread Jiri Kosina
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > The current custom solution for the G920 is not the best because > > hid_hw_start() is not called at the end of the .probe(). > > It means that any configuration retrieved after the initial hid_hw_start > > would not be exposed to user space

Re: [PATCH 13/17] HID: logitech-hidpp: make .probe usbhid capable

2017-01-18 Thread Benjamin Tissoires
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > The current custom solution for the G920 is not the best because > hid_hw_start() is not called at the end of the .probe(). > It means that any configuration retrieved after the initial hid_hw_start >

Re: [PATCH 13/17] HID: logitech-hidpp: make .probe usbhid capable

2017-01-18 Thread Benjamin Tissoires
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > The current custom solution for the G920 is not the best because > hid_hw_start() is not called at the end of the .probe(). > It means that any configuration retrieved after the initial hid_hw_start > would not be exposed to user space