RE: [PATCH v4 2/2] dt-bindings: input: Update dtbinding for adp5588

[Agarwal, Utsav]

Hi Connor,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, July 1, 2024 6:46 PM
> To: Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Agarwal, Utsav <Utsav.Agarwal@xxxxxxxxxx>; Hennerich, Michael
> <Michael.Hennerich@xxxxxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley
> <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Sa, Nuno <Nuno.Sa@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-
> input@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Artamonovs, Arturs
> <Arturs.Artamonovs@xxxxxxxxxx>; Bimpikas, Vasileios
> <Vasileios.Bimpikas@xxxxxxxxxx>; Gaskell, Oliver
> <Oliver.Gaskell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] dt-bindings: input: Update dtbinding for adp5588
> 
> [External]
> 
> 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@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > 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.
> >

I will add more description to this commit message for context.

> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Utsav Agarwal <utsav.agarwal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  .../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.

The idea behind introducing a new property was to simplify the usage in addition to making it easier to document a pure gpio mode being supported. Would it still be better to remove this?

> 
> >
> >
> > >    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).

I will add a more detailed description in the binding.

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --
> Dmitry

Thanks,
Utsav