Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 07:40:24AM -0600, Miguel Aguilar wrote:
Kevin Hilman wrote:
"Paulraj, Sandeep" <s-paulraj@xxxxxx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 08:45:31AM -0600, Miguel Aguilar wrote:
+ /* Enable Keyscan module and enable */
+ davinci_ks_write(davinci_ks, DAVINCI_KEYSCAN_AUTODET |
DAVINCI_KEYSCAN_KEYEN,
+ DAVINCI_KEYSCAN_KEYCTRL);
We seem to be hardcoded to the 4x4 matrix type here.
Some DM365 boards could use 5x3 matrix.
Thanks,
Sekhar
[MA] I will add a platform option for matrix type to choose 4x4 or
5x3
matrix.
What do think about this?
Sounds good. I am not sure if any other piece of code
needs to change though.
The strobe and interval have to change. Afcourse that change comes
into the picture only when the mode is changed from 4x4 to 5x3.
I can see that there are options given for this in board specific code.
Thanks,
Sekhar
Thanks,
Sandeep
struct davinci_ks_platform_data {
unsigned short *keymap;
u32 keymapsize;
u32 rep:1;
u32 strobe;
u32 interval;
+ u32 matrix_type;
};
I will add something like this, so from the board specific code you can
define strobe, interval and matrix type.
Make it enum at least. BTW, is it possible to add u8 rows, cols instead
and be able to handle more matrix variations?
The IP can handle only 4x4 or 5x3.
Even so, the rows, cols approach is more readable IMO.
The key sacan mode is set just by one bit 4X4 or 5X3, Is it really
necessary use rows and cols in this case?
No, if the hardware only has 2 modes (switchable by a single bit or
something like that) then an enum is more clear IMO.
ok, I will use just a enum with the two possible cases.
Thanks,
Miguel Aguilar
--
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
