Re: [PATCH v1] i2c-hid: introduce HID over i2c specification implementation

Le 7 oct. 2012 à 18:07, Benjamin Tissoires a écrit :

quoted

quoted

Basically, to me this all boils down to the question -- what is more
important: low-level transport being used, or the general function of the
device?

To me, it's the latter, and as such, everything would belong under
drivers/hid.

Then shouldn't is be drivers/input, rather?

Ouch, it will introduce more and more complexity.

Purely rhetorical question, I agree. But still.

It seems that hid transport layers should go in drivers/hid.
However, I don't like mixing the transport layer and the final
drivers. Maybe this is the time to rework a little bit the tree.
To minimize the moves, we could introduce:
drivers/hid/busses/usb
drivers/hid/busses/i2c
drivers/hid/busses/bluetooth

What about creating drivers/hid/core and move all generic stuff there? That is:
drivers/hid/core
drivers/hid/usb
drivers/hid/i2c
drivers/hid/bluetooth

Cheers,

St.