Il 20/07/22 16:48, Mattijs Korpershoek ha scritto:
MediaTek keypad has 2 modes of detecting key events:
- single key: each (row, column) can detect one key
- double key: each (row, column) is a group of 2 keys
Double key support exists to minimize cost, since it reduces the number
of pins required for physical keys.
Double key is configured by setting BIT(0) of the KP_SEL register.
Enable double key matrix support based on the mediatek,double-keys
device tree property.
Signed-off-by: Mattijs Korpershoek <mkorpershoek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@xxxxxxxxx>
diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/mt6779-keypad.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/mt6779-keypad.c
index bf447bf598fb..9a5dbd415dac 100644
--- a/drivers/input/keyboard/mt6779-keypad.c
+++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/mt6779-keypad.c
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
#define MTK_KPD_DEBOUNCE_MASK GENMASK(13, 0)
#define MTK_KPD_DEBOUNCE_MAX_MS 256
#define MTK_KPD_SEL 0x0020
+#define MTK_KPD_SEL_DOUBLE_KP_MODE BIT(0)
#define MTK_KPD_SEL_COL GENMASK(15, 10)
#define MTK_KPD_SEL_ROW GENMASK(9, 4)
#define MTK_KPD_SEL_COLMASK(c) GENMASK((c) + 9, 10)
@@ -31,6 +32,7 @@ struct mt6779_keypad {
struct clk *clk;
u32 n_rows;
u32 n_cols;
+ bool double_keys;
DECLARE_BITMAP(keymap_state, MTK_KPD_NUM_BITS);
};
@@ -67,8 +69,13 @@ static irqreturn_t mt6779_keypad_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
continue;
key = bit_nr / 32 * 16 + bit_nr % 32;
- row = key / 9;
- col = key % 9;
+ if (keypad->double_keys) {
+ row = key / 13;
+ col = (key % 13) / 2;
+ } else {
+ row = key / 9;
+ col = key % 9;
+ }
I don't fully like this if branch permanently evaluating true or false, as no
runtime can actually change this result...
In practice, it's fine, but I was wondering if anyone would disagree with the
following proposal...
struct mt6779_keypad {
.......
void (*calc_row_col)(unsigned int *row, unsigned int *col);
};
In mt6779_keypad_irq_handler:
key = bit_nr / 32 * 16 + bit_nr % 32;
keypad->calc_row_col(&row, &col);
and below...
scancode = MATRIX_SCAN_CODE(row, col, row_shift);
/* 1: not pressed, 0: pressed */
@@ -150,6 +157,8 @@ static int mt6779_keypad_pdrv_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
wakeup = device_property_read_bool(&pdev->dev, "wakeup-source");
+ keypad->double_keys = device_property_read_bool(&pdev->dev, "mediatek,double-keys");
+
dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "n_row=%d n_col=%d debounce=%d\n",
keypad->n_rows, keypad->n_cols, debounce);
@@ -166,6 +175,10 @@ static int mt6779_keypad_pdrv_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
regmap_write(keypad->regmap, MTK_KPD_DEBOUNCE,
(debounce * (1 << 5)) & MTK_KPD_DEBOUNCE_MASK);
+ if (keypad->double_keys)
keypad->calc_row_col = mt6779_keypad_calc_row_col_double_kp;
+ regmap_update_bits(keypad->regmap, MTK_KPD_SEL,
+ MTK_KPD_SEL_DOUBLE_KP_MODE, MTK_KPD_SEL_DOUBLE_KP_MODE);
+
} else {
keypad->calc_row_col = mt6779_keypad_calc_row_col_single_kp;
}
regmap_update_bits(keypad->regmap, MTK_KPD_SEL, MTK_KPD_SEL_ROW,
MTK_KPD_SEL_ROWMASK(keypad->n_rows));
regmap_update_bits(keypad->regmap, MTK_KPD_SEL, MTK_KPD_SEL_COL,
what do you think?
