linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] OMAP: Add keypad driver #3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 27 Jul 2006 02:26:29 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Komal Shah <komal_shah802003@...oo.com>
To:	Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	akpm@...l.org, juha.yrjola@...idboot.com, tony@...mide.com,
	ext-timo.teras@...ia.com, r-woodruff2@...com,
	linux-input@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net, kjh@...man.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] OMAP: Add keypad driver #3

--- Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk> wrote:

> > +
> > +	/* read the keypad status */
> > +	if (cpu_is_omap24xx()) {
> > +		int i;
> > +		for (i = 0; i < omap_kp->rows; i++)
> > +			disable_irq(OMAP_GPIO_IRQ(row_gpios[i]));
> > +	} else
> > +		/* disable keyboard interrupt and schedule for handling */
> > +		omap_writew(1, OMAP_MPUIO_BASE + OMAP_MPUIO_KBD_MASKIT);
> > +
> > +	if (!cpu_is_omap24xx()) {
> 
> This seems obfuscated.  It would be trivial to combine these two if()
> clauses.

Oops. I will update this in the next patch.

> 
> And a general note about the omap24xx vs !omap24xx differences in
> this
> file - would it make more sense for code readability to have two
> completely separate drivers?

Yeah, I had same thought when I did the integration of omap24xx H4 gpio
based keypad driver from TI OMAP tree to omap-git.  But, if Tony, Juha
and Richard agrees, then I can roll-out new omap2-gpio-keypad driver
patch along with changes into existing omap-keypad.c(will become
omap1-keypad.c then). It will be also easy for me to maintain omap2
keypad driver, as I don't have access to OMAP1 based boards.

> > +
> > +			if (machine_is_omap_osk() || machine_is_omap_h2()
> > +			   	 || machine_is_omap_h3())
> > +				udelay(9);
> > +			else
> > +				udelay(4);
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to pass this via the platform device driver? 
> It
> seems likely that other delays may be required with differing
> hardware.

Yes, we can. I will make that change.

> > +
> > +	if (machine_is_omap_h2() || machine_is_omap_h3() ||
> > +	    machine_is_omap_perseus2()) {
> > +		omap_writew(0xff, OMAP_MPUIO_BASE + OMAP_MPUIO_GPIO_DEBOUNCING);
> > +	}
> 
> Maybe this should be a flag or something?  Why does h2, h3 and
> perseus2
> require this and not others?

Yes we can put the flag there through platform data, but OMAP1
(h2/h3/perseus) owners should comment on that. Kevin/Tony?

Thanx for the detailed review.

---Komal Shah
http://komalshah.blogspot.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/