Hi Market, On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Marek Szyprowski<m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello, > > On Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:12 AM, Trilok Soni wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Marek >> Szyprowski<m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Hello, >> > >> > On Tuesday, July 14, 2009 10:25 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >> > >> >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 08:28:05AM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >> >> > Hello, >> >> > On Tuesday, July 14, 2009 5:10 AM, Kim Kyuwon wrote: >> >> > > Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >> >> > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 02:22:10PM +0530, Trilok Soni wrote: >> >> > > >> I don't see this driver picked up yet in your -next branch. We should >> >> > > >> target this driver to be mainlined in next merge window. This is very >> >> > > >> important driver for some of the embedded systems, including palm pre >> >> > > >> :) >> >> > > > I was wondering if somebody could test the patch below and if it still >> >> > > > works then I will apply to the next branch. Thanks! >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > Dear Marek, >> >> > > >> >> > > Because I don't have the NCP board(which includes the max7359 keypad) >> >> > > now, I can't test this patch. Marek, could you please test this patch? >> >> > >> >> > I would like to, but I could not find the base version to which I can apply >> >> > that patch. I've tried v2 version posted in '[PATCH] Input: add MAX7359 key >> >> > switch controller driver, v2' mail from Sat 2009-05-09 04:10 with 2 patches >> >> > posted in replies to that main, but the latest patch still fails to apply. >> >> > >> >> > Could someone send me a complete patch, so I can do a test? >> >> > >> >> >> >> Sending everything as attachments, maybe that will help... >> > >> > Ok. I've did the tests. >> > >> > MAX7359 keypad driver works after your patch, but reports much more events than >> > the previous version. In this test I pressed quickly the first button on the >> > keypad. >> > >> > Old version: >> > NCP:~# hexdump /dev/input/event0 >> > 0000000 0037 0000 e733 000b 0001 00e7 0001 0000 >> > 0000010 0037 0000 e748 000b 0000 0000 0000 0000 >> > 0000020 0037 0000 94e2 000d 0001 00e7 0000 0000 >> > 0000030 0037 0000 94f3 000d 0000 0000 0000 0000 >> > >> >> Please use evtest instead. It will give better output atleast. > > Ok. > > Old version (clean v2 patch): > > NCP:~# evtest /dev/input/event0 > Input driver version is 1.0.0 > Input device ID: bus 0x18 vendor 0x0 product 0x0 version 0x0 > Input device name: "max7359" > Supported events: > Event type 0 (Sync) > Event type 1 (Key) > Event code 107 (End) > Event code 139 (Menu) > Event code 148 (Prog1) > Event code 149 (Prog2) > Event code 177 (ScrollUp) > Event code 178 (ScrollDown) > Event code 212 (Camera) > Event code 231 (?) > Event code 474 (?) > Event type 20 (Repeat) > Testing ... (interrupt to exit) > Event: time 38.740081, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 1 > Event: time 38.740101, -------------- Report Sync ------------ > Event: time 38.850061, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 0 > Event: time 38.850077, -------------- Report Sync ------------ > > New version (updated platform definition to use struct matrix_keymap_data instead of max7359_keypad_platform_data): > > NCP:~# evtest /dev/input/event0 > Input driver version is 1.0.0 > Input device ID: bus 0x18 vendor 0x0 product 0x0 version 0x0 > Input device name: "max7359" > Supported events: > Event type 0 (Sync) > Event type 1 (Key) > Event code 107 (End) > Event code 139 (Menu) > Event code 148 (Prog1) > Event code 149 (Prog2) > Event code 177 (ScrollUp) > Event code 178 (ScrollDown) > Event code 212 (Camera) > Event code 231 (?) > Event code 474 (?) > Event type 4 (Misc) > Event code 4 (ScanCode) > Event type 20 (Repeat) > Testing ... (interrupt to exit) > Event: time 75.680066, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 01 > Event: time 75.680095, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 1 > Event: time 75.680107, -------------- Report Sync ------------ > Event: time 75.700072, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 3f > Event: time 75.700095, -------------- Report Sync ------------ > Event: time 75.830064, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 01 > Event: time 75.830093, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 0 > Event: time 75.830100, -------------- Report Sync ------------ > Event: time 75.850073, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 3f > Event: time 75.850097, -------------- Report Sync ------------ > > Something is definitely different. It looks that I missed a patch that added some additional events, because I don't think that the > threaded irq patch would cause this. > Nope, it is not because of threaded irq patch but MSC_SCAN event generation. Not to worry. -- ---Trilok Soni http://triloksoni.wordpress.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/triloksoni -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
