On Dec 12 2016 or thereabouts, Jiri Kosina wrote: > Given the timing (merge window being open) and given then NACK given by > Rob, I've now unapplied the patches (the for-4.10/i2c-hid branch is now > obsolete, and has been superseded by for-4.10/i2c-hid-nopower). > > However, this is mostly done in order to provide more time for discussion; > I still disagree with the reasoning behind the NACK. > To hopefully make things going forward a little bit, I was wondering over the week-end if we should not solve this particular issue by adding an intermediate platform DT node: instead of having: --- i2c-hid-dev@2c { compatible = "hid-over-i2c"; reg = <0x2c>; hid-descr-addr = <0x0020>; interrupt-parent = <&gpx3>; interrupts = <3 2>; vdd-supply = <sth>; init-delay-ms = <100>; }; --- we would have: --- platform-i2c-hid@01 { compatible = "very-special-board-that-needs-firmware-quirks-and-delay-of-100ms"; vdd-supply = <sth>; i2c-hid-dev@2c { compatible = "hid-over-i2c"; reg = <0x2c>; hid-descr-addr = <0x0020>; interrupt-parent = <&gpx3>; interrupts = <3 2>; }; }; --- If I am not wrong, the platform device should be initialized before i2c-hid get called, which allows to setup properly the vdd supply. On resume/suspend, the tree should be respected and we should be able to enable/disable power in the same fashion this patch provides. We could then extend this platform device at will without tinkering in i2c-hid and we could also handle the GPIOs, reset or whatever is required in the future through compatibles. Thoughts? yes? no? bullshit? Cheers, Benjamin -- 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