Chromebook touchpads & touchscreen

[Joseph Salisbury]

On 01/07/2015 08:41 AM, Chris J Arges wrote:
> On 01/07/2015 07:23 AM, Scot Doyle wrote:
>> On Tue, 6 Jan 2015, Scot Doyle wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 6 Jan 2015, Chris J Arges wrote:
>>>> On 01/05/2015 01:15 PM, Scot Doyle wrote:
>>>>> Would it be possible to have the mainline patches enabling four Chromebook 
>>>>> touchpads and one touchscreen added to 3.16? The last four depend on the 
>>>>> first and they apply to drivers/platform/chrome/chromeos_laptop.c
>>>>>
>>>>> da3b0ab75aadab63d1ffd5563100c9386e444dad  Acer C720
>>>>> 5ea9567f6126846f5dcfa8515d7ef2c238133c0d  HP Chromebook 14
>>>>> 0e1e5e590a457063c94d55c219b349bcf0d1f93a  Dell Chromebook 11
>>>>> 963cb6fa0f5f115986e970b9d97440e4906524fa  Toshiba CB35
>>>>> b90b3c4ae06af135e279c9a5aa1c640d22787fc4  Acer C720P
>>>>>
>>>> Scot,
>>>> Yes this can be added to a stable release since it falls under hardware
>>>> enablement. It would be very helpful for you to open a bug and follow
>>>> our Stable Release Update procedure to make this easier to track:
>>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/KernelUpdates
>>>>
>>>> Once the bug is filed, please either send a new email or reply to this
>>>> one with that and the SRU justification.
>>>>
>>>> Off the top of my head, are there any DTS files that need to be patched,
>>>> or any other support needed? In addition do you have a method of
>>>> verifying these particular patches once they are applied?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> --chris j arges
>>> Chris, thanks for the guidance.
>>>
>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1408105
>>>
>>> The only other possible change would be ensuring CONFIG_CHROMEOS_LAPTOP=m. 
>>> Yes, I could test by recompiling the kernel. Which tree and branch?
>>>
>>> -------
>>> SRU Justification:
>>> Impact: The Haswell-based Chromebooks have touchpads and a touchscreen 
>>> unsupported in the 3.16 kernels
>>> Fix: Upstream in 3.17
>>> Testcase: I've tested fixes by compiling and using upstream 3.17+
>>>
>> I'd like these patches to flow downstream to Debian and derivatives 
>> (through the 3.16.y-ckt extended stable tree?). Am I following the correct 
>> procedure?
>>
> Scot,
> Joe is looking at this bug, so he can request that this be applied to
> stable 3.16.y-ckt as well if it meets stable kernel criteria. CC'ing
> Kamal as well.
>
> For extended stable kernels we follow generally what's here:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> Just ensure that there is an indication of which extended stable trees
> the patch applies to. For example putting [3.16.y] in the subject line.
> You can look at stable at kernel.org for more examples. Another helpful
> practice is to CC the maintainers of the stable tree.
>
> For more specific documentation about our extended kernels you can look
> here:
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/Dev/ExtendedStable
>
> I hope this helps, thanks again for your help,
> --chris j arges

Hi Scot,

I built another test kernel for amd64 in addition to armhf.  I posted a
link to the test kernel in the bug.  Once tested, we can send a request
to have the commits applied to upstream 3.16 and SRU'd to Utopic.

Thanks,

Joe