Re: [PATCH 04/11] HID: logitech-dj: remove hidinput_input_event
From: David Herrmann <hidden>
Date: 2014-02-03 17:07:36
Also in:
lkml
Hi On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Benjamin Tissoires [off-list ref] wrote:
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 11:06 AM, David Herrmann [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Hi On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Benjamin Tissoires [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
hid-logitech-dj uses its own ->hidinput_input_event() instead of the generic binding in hid-input. Moving the handling of LEDs towards logi_dj_output_hidraw_report() allows two things: - remove hidinput_input_event in struct hid_device - hidraw user space programs can also set the LEDs Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <redacted> --- drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c | 99 +++++++++++++++---------------------------- 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c b/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c index f45279c..61d2bbf 100644 --- a/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c@@ -44,14 +44,6 @@ static const char kbd_descriptor[] = { 0x19, 0xE0, /* USAGE_MINIMUM (Left Control) */ 0x29, 0xE7, /* USAGE_MAXIMUM (Right GUI) */ 0x81, 0x02, /* INPUT (Data,Var,Abs) */ - 0x95, 0x05, /* REPORT COUNT (5) */ - 0x05, 0x08, /* USAGE PAGE (LED page) */ - 0x19, 0x01, /* USAGE MINIMUM (1) */ - 0x29, 0x05, /* USAGE MAXIMUM (5) */ - 0x91, 0x02, /* OUTPUT (Data, Variable, Absolute) */ - 0x95, 0x01, /* REPORT COUNT (1) */ - 0x75, 0x03, /* REPORT SIZE (3) */ - 0x91, 0x01, /* OUTPUT (Constant) */ 0x95, 0x06, /* REPORT_COUNT (6) */ 0x75, 0x08, /* REPORT_SIZE (8) */ 0x15, 0x00, /* LOGICAL_MINIMUM (0) */@@ -60,6 +52,18 @@ static const char kbd_descriptor[] = { 0x19, 0x00, /* USAGE_MINIMUM (no event) */ 0x2A, 0xFF, 0x00, /* USAGE_MAXIMUM (reserved) */ 0x81, 0x00, /* INPUT (Data,Ary,Abs) */ + 0x85, 0x0e, /* REPORT_ID (14) */ + 0x05, 0x08, /* USAGE PAGE (LED page) */ + 0x95, 0x05, /* REPORT COUNT (5) */ + 0x75, 0x01, /* REPORT SIZE (1) */ + 0x15, 0x00, /* LOGICAL_MINIMUM (0) */ + 0x25, 0x01, /* LOGICAL_MAXIMUM (1) */ + 0x19, 0x01, /* USAGE MINIMUM (1) */ + 0x29, 0x05, /* USAGE MAXIMUM (5) */ + 0x91, 0x02, /* OUTPUT (Data, Variable, Absolute) */ + 0x95, 0x01, /* REPORT COUNT (1) */ + 0x75, 0x03, /* REPORT SIZE (3) */ + 0x91, 0x01, /* OUTPUT (Constant) */ 0xC0 };@@ -544,10 +548,30 @@ static int logi_dj_output_hidraw_report(struct hid_device *hid, u8 * buf, size_t count, unsigned char report_type) { - /* Called by hid raw to send data */ - dbg_hid("%s\n", __func__); + struct dj_device *djdev = hid->driver_data; + struct dj_receiver_dev *djrcv_dev = djdev->dj_receiver_dev; + u8 *out_buf; + int ret; - return 0; + if (buf[0] != REPORT_TYPE_LEDS) + return -EINVAL; + + out_buf = kzalloc(DJREPORT_SHORT_LENGTH, GFP_ATOMIC); + if (!out_buf) + return -ENOMEM; + + if (count < DJREPORT_SHORT_LENGTH - 2) + count = DJREPORT_SHORT_LENGTH - 2; + + out_buf[0] = REPORT_ID_DJ_SHORT; + out_buf[1] = djdev->device_index; + memcpy(out_buf + 2, buf, count); + + ret = djrcv_dev->hdev->hid_output_raw_report(djrcv_dev->hdev, out_buf, + DJREPORT_SHORT_LENGTH, report_type);Strictly speaking the code below uses HID_REQ_SET_REPORT and you replace it with hid_output_raw_report() here (which at least for BTHID is not equivalent). Anyhow, HID-core uses hid_output_raw_report(), too, so this should be fine.Yes, you are right. This fires back on me yesterday when I tried to remove the hid_output_raw_report() calls. It occurs it works because usbhid_out_raw_report() uses set_report when there is no urbout, which is the case with logitech receivers. So I guess an ideal solution would be to implement a hid_hw_request call. However, the only concern I have with hid_hw_request is that it does not allow hidraw to play with the LEDs given that hidraw does not have an ioctl for SET_REPORT (or GET_REPORT). I already seen this issue regarding i2c_hid at some point, but it was "solved" in i2c_hid by using the same ugly trick that we have in USB-hid.
Hah! That's why it worked all the years, USB-HID checks for !urbout.. and yeah, that's what I just criticized in your i2c-hid patch.. Ok, I'm fine if we make output_report() fall back to SET_REPORT if not output-channel is supported. But we it gets ugly if we rely on that from the upper stack... hmm, don't know how to make that work but adding a hid quirk to use SET_REPORT for hidinput_input_report(). Thanks David