On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 02:47:50PM +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> Hi Conor,
>
> On Fr, 2024-06-28 at 17:21 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 10:35:51AM +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > > Add compatible for EXC81W32 touchscreen controllers.
> >
> > Could you please mention in your commit messages what makes a fallback
> > compatible inappropriate here?
>
> thank for pointing this out. Actually, I'm not sure a fallback
> compatible is inappropriate at all. There just is none currently, even
> though EXC80H60 and EXC80H84 already look compatible to me.
>
> To my understanding, there's EXC80[WH]{32,46,60,84} models, that should
> only differ in ball pitch (W or H) and targeted display size (the last
> number).
> I don't know if there are actual relevant differences between what I
> assume are model generations, such as EXC80 to EXC81. At least the
> limited currently implemented feature set in the exc3000 driver is
> identical.
>
> Given that EXC80H60, EXC80H84, and now EXC81W32 all share the same 16K
> resolution and the same message format (possible differences in
> capability to measure touch area nonwithstanding), should I prepend
> this series with a patch:
If you're prepared to update the two users to avoid adding more
dtbs_check warnings, sure.
Thanks,
Conor.
>
> @@ -14,10 +14,13 @@
>
> properties:
> compatible:
> - enum:
> - - eeti,exc3000
> - - eeti,exc80h60
> - - eeti,exc80h84
> + oneOf:
> + - const: eeti,exc3000
> + - items:
> + - enum:
> + - eeti,exc80h60
> + - const: eeti,exc80h84
> + - const: eeti,exc80h84
> reg:
> const: 0x2a
> interrupts:
>
> regards
> Philipp
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
