On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 6:22 PM AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Il 04/12/23 17:50, Doug Anderson ha scritto:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 10:59 PM Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 8:58 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:45 AM Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> @@ -44,6 +46,7 @@ trackpad2: trackpad@2c {
> >>>> reg = <0x2c>;
> >>>> hid-descr-addr = <0x0020>;
> >>>> wakeup-source;
> >>>> + status = "fail-needs-probe";
> >>>
> >>> While doing this, you could also remove the hack where the trackpad
> >>> IRQ pinctrl is listed under i2c4.
> >>
> >> Sure. I do think we can do away with it though. According to at least one
> >> schematic, the interrupt line has pull-ups on both sides of the voltage
> >> shifter.
> >>
> >> BTW, The touchscreen doesn't have pinctrl entries. This has pull-ups on
> >> both sides of the voltage shifter as well.
> >
> > I dunno if the convention is different on Mediatek boards, but at
> > least on boards I've been involved with in the past we've always put
> > pinctrl entries just to make things explicit. This meant that we
> > didn't rely on the firmware/bootrom/defaults to leave pulls in any
> > particular state. ...otherwise those external pull-ups could be
> > fighting with internal pull-downs, right?
> >
>
> MediaTek boards aren't special and there's no good reason for those to rely on
> firmware/bootrom/defaults - so there is no good reason to avoid declaring any
> relevant pinctrl entry.
I think this should be migrated to use the proper GPIO bindings: the
GPIO_PULL_UP / GPIO_PULL_DOWN / GPIO_BIAS_DISABLE flags.
But that's a different discussion.
ChenYu
