On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 07:19:06 -0600, Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 13-06-28 12:09 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > >>>> I do not agree. We want the binding to be generic and not tied > >>>> specifically to the keyreset functionality. As such 'input-keyset' or > >>>> 'input-keychord' are more appropriate. > >>> > >>> The binding is defined specifically for sysrq and specifically to > >>> perform reset action. > >> > >> Yes for now but as the examples in the binding show, it is easy to > >> envision how other drivers could use it. > > > > I think you over-complicate things here. Unlike matrix-keypad binding, > > where you have a common parsing code, here we have an individual driver. > > I really do not see anyone else using such sequences or chords as such > > processing should be done in userspace. Sysrq is quite an exception. > > To be honest I don't have a very strong opinion on the binding. I made > it as generic as possible on the guidance of the DT people. Let's see > what they think of it. Hi Mathieu, As per our conversation just now at Connect, the binding should probably look like this: Sysrq keyset binding: The /chosen node can contain a linux,input-keyset-sysrq child node to define a set of keys that will generate a sysrq when pressed together. Required properties: keyset: array of keycodes timeout-ms: duration keys must be pressed together in microseconds before generating a sysrq g. -- 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
