Hi Marge,
On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 03:36:48AM +0000, Marge Yang wrote:
> + f21->sensor_count = fn->fd.query_base_addr & (BIT(0) | BIT(1) | BIT(2) | BIT(3));
We could either use GENMASK or just 0x0f. BIT() is for individual bits.
> +
> + if (fn->fd.query_base_addr & BIT(5)) {
> + if (fn->fd.query_base_addr & BIT(6))
> + f21->query15_offset = 2;
> + else
> + f21->query15_offset = 1;
> +
> + rmi_read_block(fn->rmi_dev, fn->fd.query_base_addr + f21->query15_offset,
> + f21->data_regs, 1);
> + f21->max_number_Of_finger = f21->data_regs[0] & 0x0F;
> + } else {
> + dev_info(&fn->dev, "f21_query15 doesn't support.\n");
> + f21->query15_offset = 0;
> + f21->max_number_Of_finger = 5;
> + }
> +
> + if (fn->fd.query_base_addr & BIT(6)) {
Just double-checking - should it be BIT(5) give that reading of number of fingers
is gated by BIT(5) in the block above.
> + dev_info(&fn->dev, "Support new F21 feature.\n");
> + /*Each finger uses one byte, and the button state uses one byte.*/
> + f21->attn_data_size = f21->max_number_Of_finger + 1;
> + f21->attn_data_index_for_button = f21->attn_data_size - 1;
> + /*
> + * Each sensor uses two bytes, the button state uses one byte,
> + * and each finger uses two bytes.
> + */
> + f21->data_reg_size = f21->sensor_count * 2 + 1 +
> + f21->max_number_Of_finger * 2;
> + f21->data_reg_index_for_button = f21->sensor_count * 2;
> + } else {
> + dev_info(&fn->dev, "Support old F21 feature.\n");
> + /*Each finger uses two bytes, and the button state uses one byte.*/
> + f21->attn_data_size = f21->sensor_count * 2 + 1;
> + f21->attn_data_index_for_button = f21->attn_data_size - 1;
> + /*Each finger uses two bytes, and the button state uses one byte.*/
> + f21->data_reg_size = f21->sensor_count * 2 + 1;
> + f21->data_reg_index_for_button = f21->data_reg_size - 1;
The block is duplicated?
No need to resubmit the patch, please just provide the answer to the
above questions.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
