linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4 1/2] drivers: input: keypad: Add device tree support

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

Date:	Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:30:39 +0530
From:	"Poddar, Sourav" <sourav.poddar@...com>
To:	Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de>
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 Roland,

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de> wrote:
> 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

Not sure about the standards, but surely have seen few others like tegra
keyboards using common matrix-keyboard bindings.

One more comment which I saw in some other mail thread about
using the following
              key_1 {
                        keypad,row = <0>;
                        keypad,column = <3>;
                        linux,code = <2>;
                };
is that when there are too many keys, the whole data become quilte huge.
These problem get sorted out on using matrix-keymap bindings, since there
is a single value computed in order to describe a particular key.

~Sourav

> 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/