Re: [PATCH 0/2] Qualcomm PM8941 power key driver

[Ivan T. Ivanov]

On Tue, 2014-10-07 at 11:46 -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue 07 Oct 02:01 PDT 2014, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Hi Bjorn,
> > 
> > On Mon, 2014-10-06 at 18:11 -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > > These patches add dt bindings and a device driver for the power key block in
> > > the Qualcomm PM8941 pmic.
> > > 
> > > Courtney Cavin (2):
> > >   input: Add Qualcomm PM8941 power key driver
> > >   input: pm8941-pwrkey: Add DT binding documentation
> > > 
> > >  .../bindings/input/qcom,pm8941-pwrkey.txt          |   43 +++++
> > >  drivers/input/misc/Kconfig                         |   12 ++
> > >  drivers/input/misc/Makefile                        |    1 +
> > >  drivers/input/misc/pm8941-pwrkey.c                 |  196 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  4 files changed, 252 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/qcom,pm8941-pwrkey.txt
> > >  create mode 100644 drivers/input/misc/pm8941-pwrkey.c
> > 
> > Any reason why we cannot reuse pm8xxx-pwrkey driver? It have been
> > converted to regmap already. 
> > 
> 
> The boilerplate code is the same,

The boilerplate code is almost 100% :-)

>  but configuration registers have different
> layout and values written in them are different. 

We talk about 3 registers and 2 bit defines. struct regmap_field
should be able to help here.

> The pm8xxx block have separate
> interrupts for press and release events while pm8941 have one interrupt for
> both, so the pm8941 must read out the irq status bits to figure out which event
> it was.

Optional interrupt property? If both are defined hook old ISR, if its
only one hook pm8941 ISR?

> 
> Maybe if we introduce some vagueness related to interrupts in the dt binding
> documentation for pm8xxx we could simply reuse that binding.
> 

I would not say vagueness, we just can say that pm8941 did not have
second interrupt?

Regards,
Ivan

> Regards,
> Bjorn


--
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/