On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 03:02:42PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 02:45:03PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 11:47:01AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 12:04:49PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > 'linux,no-autorepeat' is a common property used in multiple bindings, > > > > but doesn't have a common type definition nor description. Add a common > > > > definition and drop the now redundant description from > > > > holtek,ht16k33.yaml. > > > > > > We have "autorepeat" in the common input binding description, should we > > > not promote it over "no-autorepeat"? > > > > We're kind of stuck with it I think. We can't just deprecate one and > > switch existing users as what would neither property present mean? > > I agree, we should not change existng bindings. > > > > > Hopefully, documented in input.yaml vs. matrix-keypad.yaml is enough to > > say which one is preferred for new users. > > So this is what I have issue with, as I think it will introduce > confusion: we have drivers/input/matrix-keymap.c and corresponding > binding Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/matrix-keymap.yaml that > deals with parsing keymap-related properties for various matrix keypads. > It does not specify autorepeat handling one way or another. Then we have > drivers/input/keyboard/matrix_keypad.c that is one implementation of > matrix keypads, and it does have linux,no-autorepeat, but it does not > mean that other devices resembling matrix keypad are forced to use > linux,no-autorepeat. And that is why I think putting this property into > the generic binding > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/matrix-keymap.yaml is not a good > idea. You are right. As it looks like there are only 3 users of linux,no-autorepeat, we can live with multiple definitions. Looks like we have a variety of other autorepeat properties too. Rob
