Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: google,cros-ec-keyb: Introduce switches only compatible

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 29/04/2022 18:31, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>    - $ref: "/schemas/input/matrix-keymap.yaml#"
>>
>>  properties:
>>    compatible:
>> -    const: google,cros-ec-keyb
>> +    oneOf:
>> +      - items:
>> +          - const: google,cros-ec-keyb-switches
>> +          - const: google,cros-ec-keyb
>> +      - items:
>> +          - const: google,cros-ec-keyb
> 
> nit: if I come back and read this binding later I'm not sure it would
> be obvious which compatible I should pick. Can we give any description
> here that indicates that the first choice is for devices that _only_
> have buttons and switches (the google,cros-ec-keyb is just for
> backward compatibility) and the second choice is for devices that have
> a physical keyboard and _also_ possibly some buttons/switches?
> 
> I could also imagine people in the future being confused about whether
> it's allowed to specify matrix properties even for devices that don't
> have a matrix keyboard. It might be worth noting that it's allowed (to
> support old drivers that might still be matching against the
> google,cros-ec-keyb compatible) but not required.

+1

> 
> 
>>    google,needs-ghost-filter:
>>      description:
>> @@ -50,7 +56,7 @@ examples:
>>    - |
>>      #include <dt-bindings/input/input.h>
>>      cros-ec-keyb {
>> -        compatible = "google,cros-ec-keyb";
>> +        compatible = "google,cros-ec-keyb-switches", "google,cros-ec-keyb";
> 
> Feels like we should create a second example?

+1 as well, because it really would confuse what's the difference
between them.

Best regards,
Krzysztof



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux