Re: [PATCH] Input: add MAX7359 key switch controller driver, v2

[Trilok Soni]

Hi Market,

On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Marek
Szyprowski<m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:12 AM, Trilok Soni wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Marek
>> Szyprowski<m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > On Tuesday, July 14, 2009 10:25 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 08:28:05AM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>> >> > Hello,
>> >> > On Tuesday, July 14, 2009 5:10 AM, Kim Kyuwon wrote:
>> >> > > Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> >> > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 02:22:10PM +0530, Trilok Soni wrote:
>> >> > > >> I don't see this driver picked up yet in your -next branch. We should
>> >> > > >> target this driver to be mainlined in next merge window. This is very
>> >> > > >> important driver for some of the embedded systems, including palm pre
>> >> > > >> :)
>> >> > > > I was wondering if somebody could test the patch below and if it still
>> >> > > > works then I will apply to the next branch. Thanks!
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Dear Marek,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Because I don't have the NCP board(which includes the max7359 keypad)
>> >> > > now, I can't test this patch. Marek, could you please test this patch?
>> >> >
>> >> > I would like to, but I could not find the base version to which I can apply
>> >> > that patch. I've tried v2 version posted in '[PATCH] Input: add MAX7359 key
>> >> > switch controller driver, v2' mail from Sat 2009-05-09 04:10 with 2 patches
>> >> > posted in replies to that main, but the latest patch still fails to apply.
>> >> >
>> >> > Could someone send me a complete patch, so I can do a test?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Sending everything as attachments, maybe that will help...
>> >
>> > Ok. I've did the tests.
>> >
>> > MAX7359 keypad driver works after your patch, but reports much more events than
>> > the previous version. In this test I pressed quickly the first button on the
>> > keypad.
>> >
>> > Old version:
>> > NCP:~# hexdump /dev/input/event0
>> > 0000000 0037 0000 e733 000b 0001 00e7 0001 0000
>> > 0000010 0037 0000 e748 000b 0000 0000 0000 0000
>> > 0000020 0037 0000 94e2 000d 0001 00e7 0000 0000
>> > 0000030 0037 0000 94f3 000d 0000 0000 0000 0000
>> >
>>
>> Please use evtest instead. It will give better output atleast.
>
> Ok.
>
> Old version (clean v2 patch):
>
> NCP:~# evtest /dev/input/event0
> Input driver version is 1.0.0
> Input device ID: bus 0x18 vendor 0x0 product 0x0 version 0x0
> Input device name: "max7359"
> Supported events:
>  Event type 0 (Sync)
>  Event type 1 (Key)
>    Event code 107 (End)
>    Event code 139 (Menu)
>    Event code 148 (Prog1)
>    Event code 149 (Prog2)
>    Event code 177 (ScrollUp)
>    Event code 178 (ScrollDown)
>    Event code 212 (Camera)
>    Event code 231 (?)
>    Event code 474 (?)
>  Event type 20 (Repeat)
> Testing ... (interrupt to exit)
> Event: time 38.740081, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 1
> Event: time 38.740101, -------------- Report Sync ------------
> Event: time 38.850061, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 0
> Event: time 38.850077, -------------- Report Sync ------------
>
> New version (updated platform definition to use struct matrix_keymap_data instead of max7359_keypad_platform_data):
>
> NCP:~# evtest /dev/input/event0
> Input driver version is 1.0.0
> Input device ID: bus 0x18 vendor 0x0 product 0x0 version 0x0
> Input device name: "max7359"
> Supported events:
>  Event type 0 (Sync)
>  Event type 1 (Key)
>    Event code 107 (End)
>    Event code 139 (Menu)
>    Event code 148 (Prog1)
>    Event code 149 (Prog2)
>    Event code 177 (ScrollUp)
>    Event code 178 (ScrollDown)
>    Event code 212 (Camera)
>    Event code 231 (?)
>    Event code 474 (?)
>  Event type 4 (Misc)
>    Event code 4 (ScanCode)
>  Event type 20 (Repeat)
> Testing ... (interrupt to exit)
> Event: time 75.680066, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 01
> Event: time 75.680095, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 1
> Event: time 75.680107, -------------- Report Sync ------------
> Event: time 75.700072, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 3f
> Event: time 75.700095, -------------- Report Sync ------------
> Event: time 75.830064, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 01
> Event: time 75.830093, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 0
> Event: time 75.830100, -------------- Report Sync ------------
> Event: time 75.850073, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 3f
> Event: time 75.850097, -------------- Report Sync ------------
>
> Something is definitely different. It looks that I missed a patch that added some additional events, because I don't think that the
> threaded irq patch would cause this.
>

Nope, it is not because of threaded irq patch but MSC_SCAN event
generation. Not to worry.

-- 
---Trilok Soni
http://triloksoni.wordpress.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/triloksoni
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/