linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: input: Goodix SPI HID Touchscreen

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: <ZxMfu4yxk961mZWB@ux-UP-WHL01>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2024 10:55:55 +0800
From: Charles Wang <charles.goodix@...il.com>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: krzk@...nel.org, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, hbarnor@...omium.org,
	conor.dooley@...rochip.com, jikos@...nel.org, bentiss@...nel.org,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: input: Goodix SPI HID Touchscreen

Hi Doug

On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 01:48:56PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 7:09 PM Charles Wang <charles.goodix@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > The Goodix GT7986U touch controller report touch data according to the
> > HID protocol through the SPI bus. However, it is incompatible with
> > Microsoft's HID-over-SPI protocol.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Charles Wang <charles.goodix@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  .../bindings/input/goodix,gt7375p.yaml        | 68 ++++++++++++++++---
> >  1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> I'm happy to let device tree folks make the call here, but IMO it
> would be much cleaner to just consider the I2C-connected GT7986U and
> the SPI-connected GT7986U to be different things and just use a
> different compatible string for them. So essentially go back to your
> v7 patch from before [1] but change the compatible to
> "goodix,gt7986u-spi". If, for instance, this device also had a USB
> interface then I don't think we'd try to cram it into the same
> bindings even though the same physical chip was present...
> 

Honestly, I agree with this approach, but Krzysztof seems to prefer
extending the existing binding.

Best regards,
Charles