On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 03:52:34AM +0300, George Pantalos wrote:

On Monday 16 of April 2012 16:24:07 Seth Forshee wrote:

quoted

If the latency really is noticible when you stash the ST points, here's
what I'd suggest trying instead. Stash away the last set of MT data you
saw and repeat it with each of the next two ST coordinates. I suspect
that will probably work well enough, and will allow every ST point to
still be reported. And it should significantly simplify the code as
well.

I tried your suggestion and I have to say that it works great. 
Thank you, Seth.
I hope my execution is ok. 

The implementation looks good to me. If you're confident that the
interpretation of the sync is correct, submit the patch according to the
guidelines in Documentation/SubmittingPatches and I'll be happy to give
my ack.

Seth