Re: [PATCH 2/5] Input: zinitix - do not ignore non-moving fingers
"Kaustabh Chakraborty" <[email protected]> Wed, 29 Jul 2026 21:13:25 +0530
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-samsung-soc,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-devicetree,org.kernel.vger.linux-input,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2026-07-24 12:24 -07:00, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > Hi Kaustabh, > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2026 at 12:54:04AM +0530, Kaustabh Chakraborty wrote: >> With the ZT7548 touchscreen present in the Galaxy J6, multitouch does no= t >> work reliably. This is due to the fact that the driver reports fingers >> only when their state is changed, so it's either placed against the >> scren, moved, or drawn away from the screen. >>=20 >> The function which is responsible for this is zinitix_report_finger(). >> This function is called from the IRQ handler, under the following >> condition: >>=20 >> if (p->sub_status & SUB_BIT_EXIST) >> zinitix_report_finger(bt541, i, p); >>=20 >> This implies and ensures that every valid finger must have the >> SUB_BIT_EXIST flag. >>=20 >> However, at the beginning of the function, it refuses to recognize any >> finger if it has none of SUB_BIT_UP | SUB_BIT_DOWN | SUB_BIT_MOVE. This >> excludes fingers in reports which do not move from the position since >> the previous interrupt. Add SUB_BIT_EXIST to the list of valid bits. > > This makes the check basically a no-op as SUB_BIT_EXIST would always be > set when we reach this function. It may very well be that we want to > delete this check altogether, or maybe we need to add SUB_BIT_UPDATE and > SUB_BIT_WAIT. I am curious what status bits you see when this condition > (original) triggers for you... I see 0x03 [EXIST | DOWN] when the finger touches the screen, and 0x05 [EXIST | MOVE] when it moves. When it stays in the same place (this is triggered in multitouch where one finger moves generating an event but the other is stagnant) it reports 0x01 [EXIST]. When it's lifted up it reports 0x08 [UP]. It looks like report_finger() is meant to be called when the finger is up but it isn't because EXIST is not set during the UP event. So I guess the solution is to remove the guard in the IRQ func and call report_finger() unconditionally. >>=20 >> Signed-off-by: Kaustabh Chakraborty <[email protected]> >> --- >> drivers/input/touchscreen/zinitix.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>=20 >> diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/zinitix.c b/drivers/input/touchsc= reen/zinitix.c >> index 3421b8ffb19b..fdcb80f52c91 100644 >> --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/zinitix.c >> +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/zinitix.c >> @@ -406,7 +406,7 @@ static void zinitix_report_finger(struct bt541_ts_da= ta *bt541, int slot, >> u16 x, y; >> =20 >> if (unlikely(!(p->sub_status & >> - (SUB_BIT_UP | SUB_BIT_DOWN | SUB_BIT_MOVE)))) { >> + (SUB_BIT_EXIST | SUB_BIT_UP | SUB_BIT_DOWN | SUB_BIT_MOVE)))) = { >> dev_dbg(&bt541->client->dev, "unknown finger event %#02x\n", >> p->sub_status); >> return; >>=20 > > Thanks.