On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 09:18:45PM +0100, Andre Muller wrote: > On 30/11/2020 09.01, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 10:13:06PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 3:53 AM Dmitry Torokhov > > > <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 01:37:20PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > > > > > > @@ -1297,8 +1297,6 @@ static int mxt_check_retrigen(struct mxt_data *data) > > > > > int val;is > > > > > struct irq_data *irqd; > > > > > > > > > > - data->use_retrigen_workaround = false; > > > > > - > > > > > > > > So this will result in data->use_retrigen_workaround staying "true" for > > > > level interrupts, which is not needed, as with those we will never lose > > > > an edge. So I think your patch can be reduced to simply setting > > > > data->use_retrigen_workaround to true in mxt_probe() and leaving > > > > mxt_check_retrigen() without any changes. > > > > > > I did that first but then I realized that since there is an > > > errorpath in mxt_check_retrigen() and it starts by disabling > > > the workaround so in an error occurs in > > > __mxt_read_reg() it will be left disabled. > > > > If __mxt_read_reg() fails then we will bail out and leave the device not > > operable, so leaving the workaround disabled does not change anything. > > > > > > > > But I see that I fail to account for the level-trigging > > > case where it should disable the workaround and > > > bail out so I anyway need to revise the patch. > > > > > > > However I wonder if it would not be better to simply call > > > > mxt_check_retrigen() before calling mxt_acquire_irq() in mxt_probe() > > > > instead of after. > > > > > > I don't fully understand this driver, but it seems the information > > > whether retrigen is available only appears after talking to the > > > device a bit, checking firmware and "objects" available on the > > > device and then it may already be too late. > > > > No, because the workaround is checked only in mxt_acquire_irq() which is > > called immediately preceding the check for RETRIGEN. And since > > __mxt_read_reg() is a wrapper around i2c_transfer() and does not need > > IRQs to be enalbed, we can move stuff around. Could you please check if > > the following works for you: > > > > diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c > > index dde364dfb79d..2b3fff0822fe 100644 > > --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c > > +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c > > @@ -2185,11 +2185,11 @@ static int mxt_initialize(struct mxt_data *data) > > msleep(MXT_FW_RESET_TIME); > > } > > > > - error = mxt_acquire_irq(data); > > + error = mxt_check_retrigen(data); > > if (error) > > return error; > > > > - error = mxt_check_retrigen(data); > > + error = mxt_acquire_irq(data); > > if (error) > > return error; > > This swap also fixes the driver for me. So both Linus' and your approach work here. > > The log says > [ 0.212647] atmel_mxt_ts i2c-ATML0000:01: Family: 164 Variant: 17 Firmware V1.0.AA Objects: 32 > [ 0.212804] atmel_mxt_ts i2c-ATML0000:01: Enabling RETRIGEN workaround > [ 0.228469] atmel_mxt_ts i2c-ATML0000:01: Direct firmware load for maxtouch.cfg failed with error -2 > [ 0.229979] atmel_mxt_ts i2c-ATML0000:01: Touchscreen size X960Y540 > [ 0.230023] input: Atmel maXTouch Touchpad as /devices/pci0000:00/INT3432:00/i2c-0/i2c-ATML0000:01/input/input4 > [ 0.236080] atmel_mxt_ts i2c-ATML0001:01: Family: 164 Variant: 13 Firmware V1.0.AA Objects: 41 > [ 0.236478] atmel_mxt_ts i2c-ATML0001:01: Enabling RETRIGEN workaround > [ 0.256034] atmel_mxt_ts i2c-ATML0001:01: Direct firmware load for maxtouch.cfg failed with error -2 > [ 0.257608] atmel_mxt_ts i2c-ATML0001:01: Touchscreen size X2559Y1699 > [ 0.257642] input: Atmel maXTouch Touchscreen as /devices/pci0000:00/INT3433:00/i2c-1/i2c-ATML0001:01/input/input5 Thank you for testing Andre! Linus, I think I prefer swapping around calls as that makes the logic on mxt_check_retrigen() simpler. Could you please update your patch to swap the calls as I would like to credit you for the fix. Thanks. -- Dmitry
