[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140211170621.GA13049@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 09:06:21 -0800
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: "Opensource [Anthony Olech]" <anthony.olech.opensource@...semi.com>
Cc: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
"linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Dajun Chen <david.chen@...semi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1] da9052: ONKEY: use correct register bit for key status
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 04:57:47PM +0000, Opensource [Anthony Olech] wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dmitry Torokhov [mailto:dmitry.torokhov@...il.com]
> > Sent: 11 February 2014 16:29
> ..[snip]..
> > > static void da9052_onkey_query(struct da9052_onkey *onkey) {
> > > - int key_stat;
> > > + int ret, key_stat;
> > >
> > > - key_stat = da9052_reg_read(onkey->da9052,
> > DA9052_EVENT_B_REG);
> > > - if (key_stat < 0) {
> > > + ret = da9052_reg_read(onkey->da9052, DA9052_STATUS_A_REG);
> > > + if (ret < 0) {
> > > dev_err(onkey->da9052->dev,
> > > - "Failed to read onkey event %d\n", key_stat);
> > > + "Failed to read onkey event err=%d\n", ret);
> > > + key_stat = false;
> >
> > Why do you need this assignment? Also, key_stat is integer, why are we
> > using boolean values for it?
> >
> > > } else {
> > > /*
> > > * Since interrupt for deassertion of ONKEY pin is not
> > > * generated, onkey event state determines the onkey
> > > * button state.
> > > */
> > > - key_stat &= DA9052_EVENTB_ENONKEY;
> > > + if (ret & DA9052_STATUSA_NONKEY)
> > > + key_stat = false;
> > > + else
> > > + key_stat = true;
> >
> > It seems to me that the relevant changes are replacement of
> > DA9052_EVENT_B_REG -> DA9052_STATUS_A_REG in da9052_reg_read()
> > and doing:
> >
> > key_stat &= DA9052_STATUSA_NONKEY;
> > input_report_key(onkey->input, KEY_POWER, !key_stat);
> >
> > Right?
>
> Right as far as the register and the bit within it.
>
> However, should the register read fail due to the PMIC not responding
> on the i2c bus then the previous code would just loop round the work
> queue. By explicitly using key_stat as a boolean it makes the code
> very clear that in the case of failure a 'false' value is set.
Then it should be defined as boolean.
> As it
> was the negative value of the error code would be treated as true,
> since -EFAULT being non-zero will be treated as true.
This is however not what your patch description said it does; it only
mentioned the incorrect register assignment. Maybe we shoudl do the
following then:
...
} else {
bool pressed = !(ret & DA9052_STATUSA_NONKEY);
input_report_key(onkey->input, KEY_POWER, pressed);
input_sync(onkey->input);
if (pressed)
schedule_work(...);
}
And mention that we are changing polling (no longer re-poll on read
errors) in addition to changing register/bits used.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists