LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Maximilian Luz <>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <>
	Hans de Goede <>,
	Chen Yu <>, Darren Hart <>,
	Andy Shevchenko <>,
	Benjamin Tissoires <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] input: soc_button_array for newer surface devices
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 20:19:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190716072135.GA806@penguin>


On 7/16/19 9:21 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> When you are saying that Pro 4 and later models use different
> notifications, does this mean that Pro 4 does not define any GPIOs?

Unfortunately, at least the Surface Book (first generation, buttons are
handled the same way as on the Pro 4) has GPIOs defined in MSHW0040, but
they are for different use. Specifically: They can detect if the
clipboard (screen part of the device, the device basically has two parts
that can be separated: clipboard and base) is being removed. Relying on
the GPIOs was my first idea too, but that has been reported to shut down
the Book 1 when the clipboard is detached.

As far as I know, the OEM platform revision check is the easiest way to
differentiate between those devices.

> I do not believe -EAGAIN has any special meaning in the driver core;

I think I got the -EAGAIN from an outdated LWN article when I first
started working on this, thanks for confirming.

> also when the GPIO controller is not ready gpiod_get() will return
> -EPROBE_DEFER, which is the prober way if signalling that some resource
> is not yet available and probe should be retries at a later time.
> Moreover, I do not believe that gpiod_count() needs GPIO controller to
> be ready, the count is taken from board firmware or static board file
> definition, so if gpiod_count() returns 0 it should be clear indication
> that the driver should not be used with the device.

Thank you for this insight, I will update the patch accordingly.


  reply	other threads:[~2019-07-16 18:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-02  0:37 [PATCH 0/2] Support for buttons on newer MS Surface devices Maximilian Luz
2019-07-02  0:37 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] platform: Fix device check for surfacepro3_button Maximilian Luz
2019-07-02  1:14   ` Yu Chen
2019-07-02  1:25     ` Maximilian Luz
2019-07-02  1:33       ` Maximilian Luz
2019-07-02  1:57         ` Yu Chen
2019-07-02  2:04           ` Maximilian Luz
2019-07-18 17:43   ` Andy Shevchenko
2019-07-02  0:37 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] input: soc_button_array for newer surface devices Maximilian Luz
2019-07-04 15:31   ` Maximilian Luz
2019-07-16  7:21   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2019-07-16 18:19     ` Maximilian Luz [this message]
2019-07-16 20:18       ` Dmitry Torokhov
2019-07-17 19:23         ` Maximilian Luz
2019-07-02 17:13 ` [PATCH 0/2] Support for buttons on newer MS Surface devices Andy Shevchenko
2019-07-02 17:26   ` Maximilian Luz
2019-07-20 15:15 ` Maximilian Luz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] input: soc_button_array for newer surface devices' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).