On 06/22/2013 03:50 AM, Gerhard Sittig wrote: ... > The patch set doesn't introduce that behaviour, but merely > describes it in more detail. It doesn't even introduce the > interrupt discussion into the binding document in a strict sense, > but expands on it in the hope for improved usability of the > binding after the motivation became more obvious. > > > What this part of the series does is to introduce polling mode as > an alternative to the interrupt driven detection of changes, to > improve reliability of change detection in the presence of multi > key presses. To me, this sounds more like something for Documentation/input/ rather than DT binding. ... > I suggest to have the "meta-discussions" on which documentation > belongs where and on where to put the GPIO polarity and on > whether backward compatibility needs to be kept or may be broken, > in a single spot, to not have several parallel discussions in > multiple subthreads. > > Is the cover letter or the first patch the most appropriate > message to respond to with this though in mind? Or don't you > mind if several replies for different parts of the patch set > discuss similar "background" aspects of the same series? I don't really have a preference myself; feel free to pick whichever patch or response you want to continue discussing, and reply to that; I'll just reply to whatever sub-thread/... you choose:-) -- 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
