linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] dt-bindings: input: Update dtbinding for adp5588

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: <ZoLrYTp2IUKFBvzq@google.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 10:46:09 -0700
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: utsav.agarwal@...log.com,
	Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@...log.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Arturs Artamonovs <arturs.artamonovs@...log.com>,
	Vasileios Bimpikas <vasileios.bimpikas@...log.com>,
	Oliver Gaskell <oliver.gaskell@...log.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] dt-bindings: input: Update dtbinding for adp5588

On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 04:46:12PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 04:04:51PM +0100, Utsav Agarwal via B4 Relay wrote:
> > From: Utsav Agarwal <utsav.agarwal@...log.com>
> > 
> > Updating dt bindings for adp5588. Following properties are now made
> > optional:
> > 	- interrupts
> > 	- keypad,num-rows
> > 	- keypad,num-columns
> > 	- linux,keymap
> > The proposed new property "gpio-only" has been added as an optional
> > property with an additional example.
> 
> I can see that as it is clear in the diff, but this doesn't explain why,
> which is what you need to do in your commit message.
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Utsav Agarwal <utsav.agarwal@...log.com>
> > ---
> >  .../devicetree/bindings/input/adi,adp5588.yaml     | 28 ++++++++++++++++++----
> >  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/adi,adp5588.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/adi,adp5588.yaml
> > index 26ea66834ae2..158fbf02cc16 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/adi,adp5588.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/adi,adp5588.yaml
> > @@ -46,6 +46,11 @@ properties:
> >    '#gpio-cells':
> >      const: 2
> >  
> > +  gpio-only:
> > +    description:
> > +      This property applies if keypad,num-rows, keypad,num-columns and
> > +      linux,keypad are not specified. All keys will be marked as gpio.
> 
> Why is a property required for this? Is the absence of the 3 keypad
> properties not sufficient to determine that you're in this mode?

Yes, I think it should be enough.

> 
> 
> >    interrupt-controller:
> >      description:
> >        This property applies if either keypad,num-rows lower than 8 or
> > @@ -68,10 +73,6 @@ properties:
> >  required:
> >    - compatible
> >    - reg
> > -  - interrupts
> 
> I don't understand why interrupts is no longer required.

I think it should be possible to use this chip as a GPIO controller but
not an interrupt controller, in which case one does not have to wire up
the interrupt line from it. However this requires much more elaborate
binding description (i.e. no keys and no "interrupt-controller"
property).

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry