[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F97EACA.9070603@antcom.de>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 14:15:06 +0200
From: Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de>
To: "Poddar, Sourav" <sourav.poddar@...com>
CC: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@...com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 1/2] drivers: input: keypad: Add device tree support
Hi!
On 04/25/2012 01:56 PM, Poddar, Sourav wrote:
> Even I was using the bindings as used by samsung-keypad driver. But according
> to the comments and logically too, we should use the common matrix keyboard
> bindings already descibed in
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/matrix-keymap.txt.
Fine with me. Can switch over to
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/matrix-keymap.txt
Maybe samsung-keypad should also be converted because it's subnodes
structure duplicates exactly the same thing (row,col,code) in a
different way, and we both were distracted by it, ignoring
matrix-keymap.txt? Or is it already too late (both samsung-keypad and
matrix-keypad both being standards in use) and we should put a
recommendation into one of them to use the other one for new designs?
Thanks,
Roland
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists