Sekhar,
If you and Sneha agree I will write driver in terms of davinci instead of dm365.
Thanks,
Miguel Aguilar
Nori, Sekhar wrote:
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 20:02:32, Miguel Aguilar wrote:
Sekhar,
See the comments below.
Nori, Sekhar wrote:
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 01:36:36, miguel.aguilar@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
[...]
diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/Kconfig b/drivers/input/keyboard/Kconfig
index a6b989a..08ed7d4 100644
--- a/drivers/input/keyboard/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/Kconfig
@@ -361,4 +361,10 @@ config KEYBOARD_XTKBD
To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the
module will be called xtkbd.
+config KEYBOARD_DAVINCI_DM365
How about calling it just KEYBOARD_DAVINCI in honor of this
being the first DaVinci keypad driver in drivers/input/keyboard?
Also, in the hope that this will get reused on a future DaVinci.
Unless, there is something that makes it really DM365 specific..
[MA] It is better keep it specific since that symbols refers to a driver which
is DM365 specific at the moment.
Okay. There is no device which reuses the keyscan module at
present, but there has been a lot of IP reuse in the DaVinci
family before (emac, mmc/sd, i2c, spi etc.).
+ tristate "TI DaVinci DM365 Keypad"
+ depends on ARCH_DAVINCI_DM365
+ help
+ Supports the keypad module on the DM365
+
endif
[...]
diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/davinci_dm365_keypad.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/davinci_dm365_keypad.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5db8eed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/davinci_dm365_keypad.c
@@ -0,0 +1,331 @@
+/*
+ * DaVinci DM365 Keypad Driver
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2009 Texas Instruments, Inc
+ *
+ * Author: Miguel Aguilar <miguel.aguilar@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
+ *
+ * Intial Code: Sandeep Paulraj <s-paulraj@xxxxxx>
+ *
+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+ * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
+ * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
+ * (at your option) any later version.
+ *
+ * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+ * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+ * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
+ * GNU General Public License for more details.
+ *
+ * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+ * along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
+ * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
+ */
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/init.h>
+#include <linux/interrupt.h>
+#include <linux/types.h>
+#include <linux/input.h>
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/delay.h>
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>
+#include <linux/errno.h>
+
+#include <asm/irq.h>
+
+#include <mach/hardware.h>
+#include <mach/irqs.h>
+#include <mach/keypad.h>
+
+/* Keypad registers */
+#define DM365_KEYPAD_KEYCTRL 0x0000
There are many places in the driver (functions, macros) which
probably can just be called DAVINCI_ instead of DM365_
[MA]Again, these are DM365 specific definitions, If your proposal is to make
this driver generic to Davinci instead of DM365 specific, I should get rid of
all dm365 labels, messages, function names, etc in this driver, even the
driver's name should be davinci_keypad instead of dm365_keypad, so in that sense
not only the macros and the config symbol should be changed; but for doing that
we are assuming that future chips of the Davinci family will include the same
keypad module, so they would be compatible among them to use the same driver.
Yes, typically attempt is made to reuse the IP as-is.
Slight changes in the IPs re-used have previously been
taken care use a "version" field coming from the platform
data.
The product number population below seems to be a bigger
sore than the variable/macro/Kconfig naming.
+static irqreturn_t dm365_kp_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
+{
+ int i;
+ u32 prev_status, new_status, changed;
+ int keycode = KEY_UNKNOWN;
+ struct davinci_kp *dm365_kp = dev_id;
+ int *keymap = dm365_kp->pdata->keymap;
+ u32 keymapsize = dm365_kp->pdata->keymapsize;
+ struct device *dev = &dm365_kp->input->dev;
+
+ /* Disable interrupt */
+ dm365_kp_write(dm365_kp, 0x0, DM365_KEYPAD_INTENA);
+
+ /* Reading previous and new status of the keypad */
+ prev_status = dm365_kp_read(dm365_kp, DM365_KEYPAD_PREVSTATE);
+ new_status = dm365_kp_read(dm365_kp, DM365_KEYPAD_CURRENTST);
+
+ changed = prev_status ^ new_status;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < keymapsize; i++) {
+ if ((changed >> i) & 0x1) {
Using ffs(changed) will probably lead to a faster ISR, especially
because only one key would have changed in most cases.
[MA] OK, I will try ffs.
+ keycode = keymap[i];
+ if((new_status >> i) & 0x1) {
+ /* Report release */
+ input_report_key(dm365_kp->input, keycode, 0);
+ input_sync(dm365_kp->input);
+ dev_dbg(dev, "dm365_keypad: key %d released\n",
+ keycode);
+ } else {
+ /* Report press */
+ input_report_key(dm365_kp->input, keycode, 1);
+ input_sync(dm365_kp->input);
+ dev_dbg(dev, "dm365_keypad: key %d pressed\n",
+ keycode);
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
+ /* Clearing interrupt */
+ dm365_kp_write(dm365_kp, DM365_KEYPAD_INT_ALL, DM365_KEYPAD_INTCLR);
+
+ /* Enable interrupts */
+ dm365_kp_write(dm365_kp, 0x1, DM365_KEYPAD_INTENA);
+
+ return IRQ_HANDLED;
I missed this before, if the loop above turns up nothing,
then the IRQ was not handled. IRQ_NONE will be a better return
in that case.
[...]
+ dm365_kp->irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
+ if (dm365_kp->irq <= 0) {
+ dev_err(dev, "%s: No DM365 Keypad irq\n", pdev->name);
+ ret = dm365_kp->irq;
Probe will return success when dm365_kp->irq is 0, but you actually
want a failure.
[MA] What is the proper error code for this case?.
platform_get_irq() returns an error which should be propagated. The
question is: Why is 0 not a valid IRQ number for keyscan module?
Thanks,
Sekhar
--
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
