Re: [PATCH v4 01/20] platform/x86: x86-android-tablets: convert Goodix devices to GPIO references

[Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 01:53:11AM -0800, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2026 21:41:49 +0100, Dmitry Torokhov
> <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> said:
> >>
> >> Consumers can already use generic gpiod_ interfaces even if their
> >> GPIOs are set up using lookup tables behind the scenes. There's no
> >> need for platform data.
> >
> > But there are other settings that use platform data. For example:
> >
> > struct gpio_keys_button {
> > 	unsigned int code;
> > 	int gpio;
> > 	int active_low;
> > 	const char *desc;
> > 	unsigned int type;
> > 	int wakeup;
> > 	int wakeup_event_action;
> > 	int debounce_interval;
> > 	bool can_disable;
> > 	int value;
> > 	unsigned int irq;
> > 	unsigned int wakeirq;
> > };
> >
> > This describes one gpio-keys button. Besides gpio itself there is code,
> > type, whether it is a wakeup button, whether it can be disabled, it's
> > label, etc. Those can be expressed via device properties (in case of
> > legacy boards via static device properties).
> >
> > I do not want to have a separate way of configuring GPIOs from the rest
> > of the properties. This would be very confusing.
> >
> 
> Yes I do get it as I said before. I am all for using device properties here.
> I just don't want them to be fudged like what is being done now.
> 
> >>
> >> Definitely but look at what we're doing now: -  consumers just set up
> >> GPIOs for themselves using arbitrary strings.
> >
> > Look _beyond_ GPIOs. There are other properties that also need to be
> > set. GPIOs should not be special.
> >
> 
> Agreed, I'm not advocating for using lookup tables. I'm advocating for using
> swnode correctly.

I am curious how would you approach to fixing
drivers/platform/x86/meraki-mx100.c ? The GPIOs in question belong to
"gpio_ich" which is a cell of a MFD PCI device (lpc_ich).

Maybe it has a standard ACPI HID, Andy, do you know?

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry