RE: [PATCH] Input: add MAX7359 key switch controller driver, v2

[Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>]

Hello,

On Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:23 PM Trilok Soni wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Marek
> Szyprowski<m.szyprowski@samsung.com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:12 AM, Trilok Soni wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Marek
> >> Szyprowski<m.szyprowski@samsung.com> wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > On Tuesday, July 14, 2009 10:25 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 08:28:05AM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> > On Tuesday, July 14, 2009 5:10 AM, Kim Kyuwon wrote:
> >> >> > > Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >> >> > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 02:22:10PM +0530, Trilok Soni wrote:
> >> >> > > >> I don't see this driver picked up yet in your -next branch. We should
> >> >> > > >> target this driver to be mainlined in next merge window. This is very
> >> >> > > >> important driver for some of the embedded systems, including palm pre
> >> >> > > >> :)
> >> >> > > > I was wondering if somebody could test the patch below and if it still
> >> >> > > > works then I will apply to the next branch. Thanks!
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Dear Marek,
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Because I don't have the NCP board(which includes the max7359 keypad)
> >> >> > > now, I can't test this patch. Marek, could you please test this patch?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I would like to, but I could not find the base version to which I can apply
> >> >> > that patch. I've tried v2 version posted in '[PATCH] Input: add MAX7359 key
> >> >> > switch controller driver, v2' mail from Sat 2009-05-09 04:10 with 2 patches
> >> >> > posted in replies to that main, but the latest patch still fails to apply.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Could someone send me a complete patch, so I can do a test?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Sending everything as attachments, maybe that will help...
> >> >
> >> > Ok. I've did the tests.
> >> >
> >> > MAX7359 keypad driver works after your patch, but reports much more events than
> >> > the previous version. In this test I pressed quickly the first button on the
> >> > keypad.
> >> >
> >> > Old version:
> >> > NCP:~# hexdump /dev/input/event0
> >> > 0000000 0037 0000 e733 000b 0001 00e7 0001 0000
> >> > 0000010 0037 0000 e748 000b 0000 0000 0000 0000
> >> > 0000020 0037 0000 94e2 000d 0001 00e7 0000 0000
> >> > 0000030 0037 0000 94f3 000d 0000 0000 0000 0000
> >> >
> >>
> >> Please use evtest instead. It will give better output atleast.
> >
> > Ok.
> >
> > Old version (clean v2 patch):
> >
> > NCP:~# evtest /dev/input/event0
> > Input driver version is 1.0.0
> > Input device ID: bus 0x18 vendor 0x0 product 0x0 version 0x0
> > Input device name: "max7359"
> > Supported events:
> >  Event type 0 (Sync)
> >  Event type 1 (Key)
> >    Event code 107 (End)
> >    Event code 139 (Menu)
> >    Event code 148 (Prog1)
> >    Event code 149 (Prog2)
> >    Event code 177 (ScrollUp)
> >    Event code 178 (ScrollDown)
> >    Event code 212 (Camera)
> >    Event code 231 (?)
> >    Event code 474 (?)
> >  Event type 20 (Repeat)
> > Testing ... (interrupt to exit)
> > Event: time 38.740081, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 1
> > Event: time 38.740101, -------------- Report Sync ------------
> > Event: time 38.850061, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 0
> > Event: time 38.850077, -------------- Report Sync ------------
> >
> > New version (updated platform definition to use struct matrix_keymap_data instead of
> max7359_keypad_platform_data):
> >
> > NCP:~# evtest /dev/input/event0
> > Input driver version is 1.0.0
> > Input device ID: bus 0x18 vendor 0x0 product 0x0 version 0x0
> > Input device name: "max7359"
> > Supported events:
> >  Event type 0 (Sync)
> >  Event type 1 (Key)
> >    Event code 107 (End)
> >    Event code 139 (Menu)
> >    Event code 148 (Prog1)
> >    Event code 149 (Prog2)
> >    Event code 177 (ScrollUp)
> >    Event code 178 (ScrollDown)
> >    Event code 212 (Camera)
> >    Event code 231 (?)
> >    Event code 474 (?)
> >  Event type 4 (Misc)
> >    Event code 4 (ScanCode)
> >  Event type 20 (Repeat)
> > Testing ... (interrupt to exit)
> > Event: time 75.680066, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 01
> > Event: time 75.680095, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 1
> > Event: time 75.680107, -------------- Report Sync ------------
> > Event: time 75.700072, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 3f
> > Event: time 75.700095, -------------- Report Sync ------------
> > Event: time 75.830064, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 01
> > Event: time 75.830093, type 1 (Key), code 139 (Menu), value 0
> > Event: time 75.830100, -------------- Report Sync ------------
> > Event: time 75.850073, type 4 (Misc), code 4 (ScanCode), value 3f
> > Event: time 75.850097, -------------- Report Sync ------------
> >
> > Something is definitely different. It looks that I missed a patch that added some additional events,
> because I don't think that the
> > threaded irq patch would cause this.
> >
> 
> Nope, it is not because of threaded irq patch but MSC_SCAN event
> generation. Not to worry.

I'm sorry for the commotion, but I did the test in a wrong way. I thought Dmitry has sent me a patch with the threaded irq already
integrated. Joonyoung Shim has pointed me that I was wrong. I had to apply the threaded irq patch on top of the patch Dmitry has
sent me.

To sum up - the threaded irq version does not work here on ARM S3C6410 NCP board. In /proc/interrupts I only noticed that only 1
interrupt has been triggered. No events are reported. Same was with Melfas Touchscreen driver (also only 1 interrupt triggered).

Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski
Samsung Poland R&D Center


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html