Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Input: touchscreen-iproc: Add Broadcom iProc touchscreen driver

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 15-01-14 05:02 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Hi Jonathan,

On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 02:17:49PM -0800, Jonathan Richardson wrote:
+	if (of_property_read_u32(np, "scanning_period", &val) >= 0) {
+		if (val < 1 || val > 256) {
+			dev_err(dev, "scanning_period must be [1-256]\n");
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
+		priv->cfg_params.scanning_period = val;
+	}
+
+	if (of_property_read_u32(np, "debounce_timeout", &val) >= 0) {
+		if (val < 0 || val > 255) {
+			dev_err(dev, "debounce_timeout must be [0-255]\n");
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
+		priv->cfg_params.debounce_timeout = val;
+	}
+
+	if (of_property_read_u32(np, "settling_timeout", &val) >= 0) {
+		if (val < 0 || val > 11) {
+			dev_err(dev, "settling_timeout must be [0-11]\n");
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
+		priv->cfg_params.settling_timeout = val;
+	}
+
+	if (of_property_read_u32(np, "touch_timeout", &val) >= 0) {
+		if (val < 0 || val > 255) {
+			dev_err(dev, "touch_timeout must be [0-255]\n");
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
+		priv->cfg_params.touch_timeout = val;
+	}
+
+	if (of_property_read_u32(np, "average_data", &val) >= 0) {
+		if (val < 0 || val > 8) {
+			dev_err(dev, "average_data must be [0-8]\n");
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
+		priv->cfg_params.average_data = val;
+	}
+
+	if (of_property_read_u32(np, "fifo_threshold", &val) >= 0) {
+		if (val < 0 || val > 31) {
+			dev_err(dev, "fifo_threshold must be [0-31]\n");
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
+		priv->cfg_params.fifo_threshold = val;
+	}

I think these are dveice specific and thus should have "brcm," prefix.
I'm confused as to why we need the brcm prefix? Other device tree bindings we have for other drivers do not need such prefix. Is this convention documented somewhere?

+
+	priv->ts_rotation = TS_ROTATION_0;
+	if (of_property_read_u32(np, "ts-rotation", &val) >= 0) {
+		priv->ts_rotation = val;
+		dev_dbg(dev, "ts rotation [%d] degrees\n",
+			90 * priv->ts_rotation);
+	}

This I am not quite sure about - if we want rotation or swap+invert. You
are CCed on another email (tsc2007) that talks about need of generic
touchscreen transforms in input core/of bindings.
Does such generic binding exist today? If not, I would like to go with this implementation and update to the new binding if/when it exists?

Thanks.


--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Media Devel]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Linux Omap]

  Powered by Linux