From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laxman Dewangan Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] include: dt-binding: input: create a DT header defining key codes. Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 22:41:20 +0530 Message-ID: <5203D138.4030107@nvidia.com> References: <1375798370-2231-1-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <52014E50.6030508@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hqemgate14.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.143]:9459 "EHLO hqemgate14.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757864Ab3HHQ52 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2013 12:57:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <52014E50.6030508@wwwdotorg.org> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: "dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com" , Stephen Warren , "linux@arm.linux.org.uk" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-input@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Ian Campbell , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland On Wednesday 07 August 2013 12:58 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > (CC'ing DT bindings maintainers too, hence quoting a bit of the patch) > > On 08/06/2013 08:12 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >> Many of Key device tree bindings uses the constant number as key code >> which matches with kernel header key code and then comment as follows >> for reference/better readability: >> linux,code = <102>; /* KEY_HOME */ >> >> Create a DT header which defines all the key code so that DT key bindings >> can use it as follows: >> linux,code = ; > This looks fine to me. > Reviewed-by: Stephen Warren > > A comment in support of the patch: This is adding OS-specific content to > the DT. However, the bindings this header file supports are already > written that way. There's not really any alternative here, since some > numbering scheme had to be chosen for keycodes, and it may as well be > the same set as the first/primary OS that'll use the binding. > > As far as merging it, this patch should probably go through the core DT > tree, perhaps in a topic branch so that e.g. Tegra an MVEBU can merge it > in to apply your subsequent patches (or we can just wait until the next > kernel release to merge them in). Do I need to include anyone for this patch to be applied or can go through Dmitry's input git branch?