On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:41:52PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:23:34AM -0500, Michael Welling wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 06:51:41PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > Hi Michael, > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 07:17:01PM -0500, Michael Welling wrote: > > > > Adds support for the i2c based tsc2004. Support was added to the tsc2005 driver > > > > due to the similarity of the devices. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Welling <mwelling@xxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > v2: Fixes Kconfig based on report for 0-day build bot. > > > > > > > > .../bindings/input/touchscreen/tsc2004.txt | 38 ++++ > > > > drivers/input/touchscreen/Kconfig | 7 +- > > > > drivers/input/touchscreen/tsc2005.c | 206 ++++++++++++++++----- > > > > > > Could we maybe split the code into core, spi and i2c drivers instead of > > > keeping everything together and rely on #ifdefs? > > > > > Dmitry, > > > > So then we have three files? > > Perhaps: > > drivers/input/touchscreen/tsc2004.c > > drivers/input/touchscreen/tsc2005.c > > drivers/input/touchscreen/tsc200x-core.c > > > > Please ellaborate exactly how you want things to be structured and named so > > that I don't waste time in revision. > > Sure, the naming above is fine. You'd have to export the > tsc_common_probe() and put I2C and SPI bits into tsc2005.c/tsc2004.c > > I'd probably have separate Kconfig entries for TSC2004 and TSC2005 and > have the core be invisible module that the former 2 explicitly "select". > > Does this make sense? Yes it does. I have been told that using wildcard names is bad in other subsystems. Perhaps tsc200x-core.c should be called something else because it has nothing to do with the tsc2007 but it is covered by the wildcard. You you think this is a big deal? > > Thanks. > > -- > Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
