Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] input: keyboard: snvs_pwrkey: Send key events for i.MX6 S, DL and Q

From: robin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 17:32:38 +0100

On 2019-11-20 10:27, Marco Felsch wrote:
> Hi Robin,
> 
> On 19-09-16 16:37, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 07:45:37AM +0000, Robin Gong wrote:
>> > On 2019/9/13 15:31 robin <[email-masked]> wrote:>
>> > > Hi Dmitry,
>> > >
>> > > On 2019-09-12 22:13, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> > > > Hi Robin,
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 06:23:29AM +0000, Robin van der Gracht wrote:
>> > > >> The first generation i.MX6 processors does not send an interrupt when
>> > > >> the power key is pressed. It sends a power down request interrupt if
>> > > >> the key is released before a hard shutdown (5 second press). This
>> > > >> should allow software to bring down the SoC safely.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> For this driver to work as a regular power key with the older SoCs,
>> > > >> we need to send a keypress AND release when we get the power down
>> > > >> request irq.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Signed-off-by: Robin van der Gracht <[email-masked]>
>> > > >> ---
>> > > >> @@ -67,13 +83,17 @@ static irqreturn_t imx_snvs_pwrkey_interrupt(int
>> > > >> irq, void *dev_id)  {
>> > > >>  	struct platform_device *pdev = dev_id;
>> > > >>  	struct pwrkey_drv_data *pdata = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> > > >> +	unsigned long expire = jiffies;
>> > > >>  	u32 lp_status;
>> > > >>
>> > > >>  	pm_wakeup_event(pdata->input->dev.parent, 0);
>> > > >>
>> > > >>  	regmap_read(pdata->snvs, SNVS_LPSR_REG, &lp_status);
>> > > >> -	if (lp_status & SNVS_LPSR_SPO)
>> > > >> -		mod_timer(&pdata->check_timer, jiffies +
>> > > >> msecs_to_jiffies(DEBOUNCE_TIME));
>> > > >> +	if (lp_status & SNVS_LPSR_SPO) {
>> > > >> +		if (pdata->minor_rev > 0)
>> > > >> +			expire = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(DEBOUNCE_TIME);
>> > > >> +		mod_timer(&pdata->check_timer, expire);
>> > > >
>> > > > Why do we even need to fire the timer in case of the first generation
>> > > > hardware? Just send press and release events directly from the ISR.
>> > That timer looks like a software debounce to prevent unexpected and
>> > meaningless interrupt/event caused by quick press/release.
>> 
>> Right, but in case of the first generation hardware we schedule the
>> timer immediately (expire == 0) and do not check state of the hardware
>> in the timer handler, but rather simply emit down/up events, so we do
>> not really get any benefit from the timer (again, I am talking about
>> first generation hardware only).
> 
> Did you prepared a v4? Just ask to avoid a duplicated work :)

No I haven't. Not sure what the public wants. Use timer, don't use 
timer..

v3 has had long term testing though ;)

Regards,
Robin van der Gracht

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel