Hi Dmitry, On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:23:58PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: >> >> For the key repeat feature, we need to set this after the input device >> is registered. So we would need to add a matrix_keypad_setup_input() or >> similar to be called by the driver after input_register_device(). I am >> less keen on that idea, and less again on the alternative of perhaps >> matrix_keypad_register_device() which does input_register_device() and >> then sets up the key repeat. Thoughts? > > No, we already have default rate and delay. Unless you can prove that > random firmware writer's idea of appropriate delay and rate is better > then current default - for everyone - and then can successfully argue > that that obviously best delay/rate combo should not replace the current > one but stay only in DT bindings, let's keep relying on users adjusting > their own preferences from respective desktop environments/console/etc. Seems reasonable. My only comment on this is that the device tree comes from kernel, not firmware. This lets us configure an embedded system easily (where the user may not have access to repeat rate preferences). Grant are you OK with me just dropping the repeat settings, and keeping the other two? If so I will respin the patch. Regards, Simon > > Thanks. > > -- > Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
