[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150529202123.GY2026@saruman.tx.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 15:21:23 -0500
From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>
To: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
CC: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>, <pali.rohar@...il.com>,
<sre@...ian.org>, <sre@...g0.de>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>, <tony@...mide.com>,
<khilman@...nel.org>, <aaro.koskinen@....fi>,
<ivo.g.dimitrov.75@...il.com>, <patrikbachan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix n900 dts file to work around 4.1 touchscreen
regression on n900
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 10:17:45PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 09:56:29PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Fri 2015-05-29 14:49:55, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 09:32:11PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > Fix dts to match what the Linux kernel expects. This works around
> > > > touchscreen problems in 4.1 linux on Nokia n900.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/tsc2005.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/tsc2005.txt
> > > > index 4b641c7..09089a6 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/tsc2005.txt
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/tsc2005.txt
> > > > @@ -32,8 +32,8 @@ Example:
> > > > touchscreen-fuzz-x = <4>;
> > > > touchscreen-fuzz-y = <7>;
> > > > touchscreen-fuzz-pressure = <2>;
> > > > - touchscreen-max-x = <4096>;
> > > > - touchscreen-max-y = <4096>;
> > > > + touchscreen-size-x = <4096>;
> > > > + touchscreen-size-y = <4096>;
> > >
> > > IMHO, the older binding needs to be supported as well. It's fine to
> > > update the DTS for the new binding, but even Documentation says
> > > touchscreen-max-[xy] and if the driver changed that, the driver should
> > > be fixed too. Besides, it seems like this has been in tree since
> > > v3.16:
> >
> > Agreed. In parent email, I have list of two commits that should be
> > reverted.
>
> So, if we sums things up. You introduce in some documentation example
> some property, that you never document, that you still use in one
it was Documented in DT bindings document for this particular driver.
What are you talking about ?
> single DT, you don't even use that property in your driver, and now
> that you realise you meant something else, you want the code that
not Pali, Sebastian.
> actually parse the *right* property and does the right thing, that all
> other DT agree (and depend on) to be reverted?
We shouldn't revert, that I agree. But both properties should be parsed.
--
balbi
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists