Re: [RFC PATCH v3 4/5] arm64: dts: mediatek: mt8173-elm-hana: Mark touchscreens and trackpads as fail

[AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>]

Il 06/12/23 03:55, Chen-Yu Tsai ha scritto:
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 6:22 PM AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
> <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> wrote:
>>
>> Il 04/12/23 17:50, Doug Anderson ha scritto:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 10:59 PM Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 8:58 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:45 AM Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -44,6 +46,7 @@ trackpad2: trackpad@2c {
>>>>>>                   reg = <0x2c>;
>>>>>>                   hid-descr-addr = <0x0020>;
>>>>>>                   wakeup-source;
>>>>>> +               status = "fail-needs-probe";
>>>>>
>>>>> While doing this, you could also remove the hack where the trackpad
>>>>> IRQ pinctrl is listed under i2c4.
>>>>
>>>> Sure. I do think we can do away with it though. According to at least one
>>>> schematic, the interrupt line has pull-ups on both sides of the voltage
>>>> shifter.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, The touchscreen doesn't have pinctrl entries. This has pull-ups on
>>>> both sides of the voltage shifter as well.
>>>
>>> I dunno if the convention is different on Mediatek boards, but at
>>> least on boards I've been involved with in the past we've always put
>>> pinctrl entries just to make things explicit. This meant that we
>>> didn't rely on the firmware/bootrom/defaults to leave pulls in any
>>> particular state. ...otherwise those external pull-ups could be
>>> fighting with internal pull-downs, right?
>>>
>>
>> MediaTek boards aren't special and there's no good reason for those to rely on
>> firmware/bootrom/defaults - so there is no good reason to avoid declaring any
>> relevant pinctrl entry.
> 
> I think this should be migrated to use the proper GPIO bindings: the
> GPIO_PULL_UP / GPIO_PULL_DOWN / GPIO_BIAS_DISABLE flags.
> 
> But that's a different discussion.
> 

100% agreed.

Cheers,
Angelo