Hi Kevin, On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Ben, > > Ben Gardiner <bengardiner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> The da850-evm baseboard (BB) and its UI board both have tca6416 IO expanders. >> They are bootstrapped to different I2C addresses so they can be used >> concurrently. >> >> The expander on the UI board is currently used to enable/disable the >> peripherals that are available on the UI board. In addition to this >> functionality the expander is also connected to 8 pushbuttons. The expander >> on the baseboard is not currently used; it is connected to deep sleep enable, >> sw reset, a push button, some switches and LEDs. >> >> This proposed patch series enables the push buttons and switches on the UI and >> BB expanders using the gpio-keys polling mode patch by Gabor Juhos. Some >> work was performed to test irq-based gpio-keys support on the expanders (a WIP >> patch can be posted on request) but I believe that it is not possible to use >> irq-based gpio-keys on IO expanders for arm systems at this time. > > Thanks for your patience and persistence on this series, and thanks for > working closely with the input folks to get the issues worked through. It is my pleasure. > This series looks good to me, so I'll be queuing it in davinci-next for > 2.6.38. It should show up in davinci git shortly. Please validate > things are working as expected there. Were there any changes needed to > the defaults in da8xx_omapl_defconfig to enable these features by > default? or does the Kconfig change in PATCH 5/5 cover it? Thank you very much, Kevin. I will check linux-davinci/master on monday. Yes, the 5/5 covers the necessary Kconfig changes; it makes the polled gpio keys default-on for da850evm. > Also, I really appreciate the thorough patch descriptions and history > information. This greatly eases the work of maintainers. Thanks! Again, you are most welcome. > One minor question: the series has a couple of Signed-off-by tags from > Sekhar Nori. The s-o-b tag is for folks on the delivery path, and based > on what I saw, these should probably be Acked-by tags from Sekhar, since > he certainly helped on the review/test/validate side, but AFAICT, was > not an author or on the delivery path. If I'm wrong on this (e.g., if > Sekhar actually did author some of those patches) let me know, otherwise > I'll change the s-o-b to Acked-by for Sekhar. The s-o-b 's for Sehkar are because I folded-in suggested changes submitted in review by Sehkar in the form of a patch. I 'think' this qualifies as authorship. I'll leave it to your good judgement. Best Regards, Ben Gardiner --- Nanometrics Inc. http://www.nanometrics.ca -- 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
