[sane-devel] [PATCH] gt68xx-Backend: OpticSlim M12

[Henning Meier-Geinitz]

Hi,

On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 05:05:18PM +0200, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> please find attached a patch to make the OpticSlim M12 scanner
> work. Work here means, scan a sheet.

I have included the patch into CVS with some modifications. Please
check if it still works. See below for details.

> Calibration is not available,

How does that work with sheet-fed scanners at all? Is there also some
kind of calibration area? 

> area selection is limited - positioning does currently not work.

That means that length and width can be changed but not tl-x and tl-y?

> The patch is meant as a starting point to make gt68xx based sheet-fed scanner 
> work. It should apply to the current cvs.
> 
> @Henning: It's up to you to include it. Maybe some changes are needed - I'll
>           test them.
> 
> Ciao,
> Gerhard

> --- sane-backends/doc/descriptions/gt68xx.desc.orig	2005-09-27 11:19:02.000000000 +0200
> +++ sane-backends/doc/descriptions/gt68xx.desc	2005-09-29 16:57:39.000000000 +0200

[...]

> +  if (s->dev->model->flags & GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)
> +    {
> +      s->val[OPT_BACKTRACK_LINES].w = 0x3f;
> +      DISABLE (OPT_BACKTRACK_LINES);
> +    }
> +

Is it really necessary to disable that option unconditionally?
Otherwise I would move the check for GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED up to the
normal setting of that option (normally 0x3f is used for CCD).

> -  RIE (gt68xx_scanner_calibrate (s, &scan_request));
> +  if ( !(s->dev->model->flags & GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)) {
> +	  RIE (gt68xx_scanner_calibrate (s, &scan_request));
> +  }

I haven't changed that because coarse and fine calibration is turned
off anyway for that scanner.

> --- sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_devices.c.orig	2005-09-27 11:18:57.000000000 +0200
> +++ sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_devices.c	2005-09-29 11:29:05.000000000 +0200

I used a new command_set for sheet-fed types. this way we have more
flexibility.

Also there is one more level of indirection (always call
gt68xx_device_*, not gt68xx_generic_* or gt68xx_gt6816_* directly).

> --- sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_generic.c.orig	2005-09-27 11:18:57.000000000 +0200
> +++ sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_generic.c	2005-09-29 11:29:49.000000000 +0200
> @@ -96,10 +96,17 @@ gt68xx_generic_read_scanned_data (GT68xx
>  
>    RIE (gt68xx_device_req (dev, req, req));
>  
> -  if (req[0] == 0)
> -    *ready = SANE_TRUE;
> +  *ready = SANE_FALSE;
> +  if (dev->model->flags & GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)
> +    {
> +      if (req[0] == 0 && req[1] == 0x35 )
> +	*ready = SANE_TRUE;
> +    }

Is this really necessary? I know that 95% of the gt68xx scanners
return 00 35 but I only test for 00 beacuse of the 5% which don't
return the 35. If it also works with the test only for the 00, I would
prefer to keep the old version. At the moment, i have apllied your
patch, however.


in gt68xx_geneirc_set_exposure-time:

> +  if (dev->model->flags & GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)
> +    return SANE_STATUS_GOOD;
> +

Not applied. Added a check in gt68xx_high.c instead.

> --- sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_gt6816.c.orig	2005-06-01 13:28:18.000000000 +0200
> +++ sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_gt6816.c	2005-09-29 11:23:28.000000000 +0200
> @@ -217,6 +217,9 @@ gt6816_carriage_home (GT68xx_Device * de
>  {
>    GT68xx_Packet req;
>  
> +  if (dev->model->flags & GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)
> +    return SANE_STATUS_GOOD;
> +

Not applied. Added checks in gt68xx.c instead.


In stop scan:
>  {
>    GT68xx_Packet req;
>  
> +  if (dev->model->flags & GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED) 
> +    {
> +      memset (req, 0, sizeof (req));
> +      req[0] = 0x42;
> +      req[1] = 0x01;

Not applied. Used gt6801_stop_scan instead in the new command_set.

Bye,
  Henning