linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/14] Remove support for platform data from samsung keypad

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: <803e3902-cec9-49ed-baff-d26e578a8ab7@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 11:40:56 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
 "Mark Brown" <broonie@...nel.org>, "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-input@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, patches@...nsource.cirrus.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] Remove support for platform data from samsung keypad

On Mon, Aug 19, 2024, at 06:57, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>
> This series attempts to rework samsumg=keypad driver to stop using
> platform data and instead rely on generic device properties only.
>
> The first 8 patches are general cleanup/facelift patches.
>
> The 9th patch introduces alternative binding that is more compact that
> the original one, which makes it more suitable for use in legacy (non
> DT) boards with static device properties. Note that the "new" binding is
> the standard binding for matrix keypads.
>
> Patch #10 implements the new binding in the driver, #11 converts the
> only user of platform data in the mainline tree to the static device
> properties, and #12 drops support for platform data from the driver.
>
> Patches #13 and #14 are "bonus" converting the rest of crag6410 to use
> software nodes/properties to describe GPIO keys, LEDs and other
> peripherals. Note that I believe they fix and issue with recent
> conversion to GPIO lookup tables - the names of gpiochip structures I
> think are "GP<N>" ("GPK", "GPL", etc) and not "GPIO<N>".

I had a (brief) look at the patches, everything looks fine to
me, thanks for working on this! Let's see what Mark and 
Krzysztof think.

      Arnd