Hi Scott, On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 08:49:15AM -0800, Scott Branden wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > Comments inline. I still have an issue with vendor prefix as there > are not documented guidelines I can find in this area? I looked and I could not locate it written down either. I think Grant is in Santa Rosa this week, I'll ask him to clarify. > > > On 15-02-09 04:51 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > >Hi Scott, > > > >On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 04:07:40PM -0800, Scott Branden wrote: > >>Documents the Broadcom keypad controller device tree bindings. > >> > >>Reviewed-by: Ray Jui <rjui@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>Signed-off-by: Scott Branden <sbranden@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>--- > >> .../devicetree/bindings/input/brcm,bcm-keypad.txt | 118 +++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 118 insertions(+) > >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/brcm,bcm-keypad.txt > >> > >>diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/brcm,bcm-keypad.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/brcm,bcm-keypad.txt > >>new file mode 100644 > >>index 0000000..645829d > >>--- /dev/null > >>+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/brcm,bcm-keypad.txt > >>@@ -0,0 +1,118 @@ > >>+* Broadcom Keypad Controller device tree bindings > >>+ > >>+Broadcom Keypad controller is used to interface a SoC with a matrix-type > >>+keypad device. The keypad controller supports multiple row and column lines. > >>+A key can be placed at each intersection of a unique row and a unique column. > >>+The keypad controller can sense a key-press and key-release and report the > >>+event using a interrupt to the cpu. > >>+ > >>+This binding is based on the matrix-keymap binding with the following > >>+changes: > >>+ > >>+keypad,num-rows and keypad,num-columns are required. > >>+ > >>+Required SoC Specific Properties: > >>+- compatible: should be "brcm,bcm-keypad" > >>+ > >>+- reg: physical base address of the controller and length of memory mapped > >>+ region. > >>+ > >>+- interrupts: The interrupt number to the cpu. > >>+ > >>+Board Specific Properties: > >>+- keypad,num-rows: Number of row lines connected to the keypad > >>+ controller. > >>+ > >>+- keypad,num-columns: Number of column lines connected to the > >>+ keypad controller. > >>+ > >>+- key-interrupt-trigger-type: The type of interrupt trigger asociated with the Keypad matrix. > >>+ > >>+ KEYPAD_INTERRUPT_NO_TRIGGER = 0 > >>+ KEYPAD_INTERRUPT_RISING_EDGE = 1 > >>+ KEYPAD_INTERRUPT_FALLING_EDGE = 2 > >>+ KEYPAD_INTERRUPT_BOTH_EDGES = 3 > > > >Can we get this data from the interrupt spec? > I don't understand your question. Could you elaborate? > But, looking at this closer this determines when the hardware should > generate interrupts. I think we would always need to set it to both > edges and this binding option can probably we removed? What I meant that interrupt binding allows specifying the trigger and you have separate binding for trigger here. It would be nice to have just one (the standard interrupt binding). > > > >>+ > >>+- col-debounce-filter-period: The debounce period for the Column filter. > >>+ > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_1_ms = 0 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_2_ms = 1 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_4_ms = 2 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_8_ms = 3 > > > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_16_ms = 4 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_32_ms = 5 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_64_ms = 6 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_128_ms = 7 > >>+ > >>+- status-debounce-filter-period: The debounce period for the Status filter. > >>+ > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_1_ms = 0 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_2_ms = 1 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_4_ms = 2 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_8_ms = 3 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_16_ms = 4 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_32_ms = 5 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_64_ms = 6 > >>+ KEYPAD_DEBOUNCE_128_ms = 7 > > > >I could swear device-specific properties should be in form of > ><vendor-prefix>,<property-name> to ensure it won't clash with changes on > >subsystem level later on. Device-tree folks, what say you? > I see examples with and without vendor-prefix. > qcom,pm8xxx-keypad.txt does not have prefixes > st-keyscan.txt does have a prefix > > I can't find any documented guidelines for this. As I mentioned I'll try to get clarification on this. > Clash changes should not happen because as new standard properties > are added the drivers should be adjusted to use the new dt-bindings? This is a misconception: device tree bindings are supposed to form ABI (and the goal to eventually separate them from the kernel) and so we need to support old bindings in new kernels. 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
