[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50E7326F.7090201@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 12:50:07 -0700
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
CC: dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, grant.likely@...retlab.ca,
rob.herring@...xeda.com, swarren@...dia.com,
devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] input: keyboard: tegra: add support for rows/cols
configuration from dt
On 01/04/2013 04:02 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> The NVIDIA's Tegra KBC has maximum 24 pins to make matrix keypad.
> Any pin can be configured as row or column. The maximum column pin
> can be 8 and maximum row pin can be 16.
>
> Remove the assumption that all first 16 pins will be used as row
> and remaining as columns and Add the property for configuring pins
> to either row or column from DT. Update the devicetree binding
> document accordingly.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/nvidia,tegra20-kbc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/nvidia,tegra20-kbc.txt
> Required properties:
> +- nvidia,kbc-rows: The KBC pins which are configured as row. This is the
> + array of pinmnumber.
> +- nvidia,kbc-cols: The KBC pins which are configured as column. This is the
> + array of pinmnumber.
"the array of pinmnumber" -> "an array of pin numbers"?
I wonder if "row-pins" and "col-pins" would be a better name; "rows" and
"cols" sound like a count not a lines. But perhaps that's just
bike-shedding.
> + linux,keymap = < 0x00000074
> + 0x00010067
> + 0x00020066
> + 0x01010068
> + 0x02000069
> + 0x02010070
> + 0x02020071 >;
Nit-pick: no space after < or before >. At least, the Tegra DTs are all
currently cleaned up that way.
> diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/tegra-kbc.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/tegra-kbc.c
> + /* Set all pins as non-configured */
> + for (i = 0; i < KBC_MAX_GPIO; i++) {
> pdata->pin_cfg[i].num = i;
> + pdata->pin_cfg[i].type = PIN_CFG_IGNORE;
> + }
...
> + for (i = 0; i < num_rows; i++) {
> + pdata->pin_cfg[rows_cfg[i]].type = PIN_CFG_ROW;
> + pdata->pin_cfg[rows_cfg[i]].num = i;
If we're setting up "num" here for the valid rows/cols, then why is the
".num = i" assignment needed in the loop above that sets .type = IGNORE?
> }
>
> + for (i = 0; i < num_cols; i++) {
> + pdata->pin_cfg[cols_cfg[i]].type = PIN_CFG_COL;
> + pdata->pin_cfg[cols_cfg[i]].num = i;
> }
> - if (!pdata) {
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(pdata)) {
> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Platform data missing\n");
> - return -EINVAL;
> + return (pdata) ? PTR_ERR(pdata) : -EINVAL;
No need for () around the first use of pdata there.
--
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