Hi,
On Sun, Nov 10, 2024 at 11:50 PM Charles Wang <charles.goodix@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> This patch introduces the following changes:
> - Adds OF match table.
> - Hardcodes hid-report-addr in the driver rather than fetching it
> from the device property.
>
> Signed-off-by: Charles Wang <charles.goodix@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/hid/hid-goodix-spi.c | 17 +++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-goodix-spi.c b/drivers/hid/hid-goodix-spi.c
> index 6ae2300a6..80c0288a3 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-goodix-spi.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-goodix-spi.c
> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
> #define GOODIX_HID_REPORT_DESC_ADDR 0x105AA
> #define GOODIX_HID_SIGN_ADDR 0x10D32
> #define GOODIX_HID_CMD_ADDR 0x10364
> +#define GOODIX_HID_REPORT_ADDR 0x22C8C
>
> #define GOODIX_HID_GET_REPORT_CMD 0x02
> #define GOODIX_HID_SET_REPORT_CMD 0x03
> @@ -701,12 +702,7 @@ static int goodix_spi_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(ts->reset_gpio),
> "failed to request reset gpio\n");
>
> - error = device_property_read_u32(dev, "goodix,hid-report-addr",
> - &ts->hid_report_addr);
> - if (error)
> - return dev_err_probe(dev, error,
> - "failed get hid report addr\n");
> -
> + ts->hid_report_addr = GOODIX_HID_REPORT_ADDR;
> error = goodix_dev_confirm(ts);
> if (error)
> return error;
> @@ -790,6 +786,14 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id goodix_spi_acpi_match[] = {
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, goodix_spi_acpi_match);
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> +static const struct of_device_id goodix_spi_of_match[] = {
> + { .compatible = "goodix,gt7986u-spifw", },
> + { }
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, goodix_spi_of_match);
> +#endif
> +
> static const struct spi_device_id goodix_spi_ids[] = {
> { "gt7986u" },
> { },
> @@ -800,6 +804,7 @@ static struct spi_driver goodix_spi_driver = {
> .driver = {
> .name = "goodix-spi-hid",
> .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(goodix_spi_acpi_match),
> + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(goodix_spi_of_match),
I can never quite remember what the current preference is in regards
to "OF" tables (whether to use #ifdef like you've done or mark them
`__maybe_unused`), so maybe someone will request you change it. ...but
IMO what you have is fine and looks to be properly guarded with
of_match_ptr(). As far as I'm concerned, this patch looks OK.
Oh, I guess the one "nit" is that I would have put "spi" in the
subject, making it "HID: hid-goodix-spi: Add OF supports". It might be
worth sending a v5 for that (after waiting a day or two) unless a
maintainer tells you not to.
In any case:
Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
