linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] RFC: input: Extend matrix-keypad device tree binding

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]

Message-ID: <CAPnjgZ0baa73BEJ8VGW=OMGSe0k=FCz4wnCwv95R8VcGUmoRww@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:41:47 -0800
From:	Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>
To:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Devicetree Discuss <devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>,
	Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>,
	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
	Sourav Poddar <sourav.poddar@...com>,
	Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@...omium.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: input: Extend matrix-keypad device tree binding

Hi Dmitry,

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:23:58PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote:
>>
>> For the key repeat feature, we need to set this after the input device
>> is registered. So we would need to add a matrix_keypad_setup_input() or
>> similar to be called by the driver after input_register_device(). I am
>> less keen on that idea, and less again on the alternative of perhaps
>> matrix_keypad_register_device() which does input_register_device() and
>> then sets up the key repeat. Thoughts?
>
> No, we already have default rate and delay. Unless you can prove that
> random firmware writer's idea of appropriate delay and rate is better
> then current default - for everyone - and then can successfully argue
> that that obviously best delay/rate combo should not replace the current
> one but stay only in DT bindings, let's keep relying on users adjusting
> their own preferences from respective desktop environments/console/etc.

Seems reasonable. My only comment on this is that the device tree
comes from kernel, not firmware. This lets us configure an embedded
system easily (where the user may not have access to repeat rate
preferences).

Grant are you OK with me just dropping the repeat settings, and
keeping the other two? If so I will respin the patch.

Regards,
Simon

>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Dmitry
--
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/