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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <50D492B8.9030205@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:47:52 -0600
From:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
To:	Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>
CC:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de>,
	Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Devicetree Discuss <devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
	Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>,
	Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@...omium.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	"linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
	Sourav Poddar <sourav.poddar@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: input: Extend matrix-keypad device tree binding

On 12/20/2012 03:41 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> 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).

Maybe for your case, but in general the DT is not tied to the kernel.

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

One comment is these properties are already defined for omap. You should
delete them from omap-keypad.txt and refer to this.

Rob

> Regards,
> Simon
> 
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> --
>> Dmitry
> _______________________________________________
> devicetree-discuss mailing list
> devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
> 

--
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/