lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Input: mpr121-polled: Add polled driver for MPR121
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 01:31:31PM +0200, Michal Vokáč wrote:
> On 25. 07. 19 16:40, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 02:58:02PM +0200, Michal Vokáč wrote:
> > > On 25. 07. 19 10:57, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > > Hi Michal,
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 08:51:17AM +0200, Michal Vokáč wrote:
> > > > > On 21. 05. 19 7:37, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Michal,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 03:12:49PM +0200, Michal Vokáč wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have to deal with a situation where we have a custom i.MX6 based
> > > > > > > platform in production that uses the MPR121 touchkey controller.
> > > > > > > Unfortunately the chip is connected using only the I2C interface.
> > > > > > > The interrupt line is not used. Back in 2015 (Linux v3.14), my
> > > > > > > colleague modded the existing mpr121_touchkey.c driver to use polling
> > > > > > > instead of interrupt.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For quite some time yet I am in a process of updating the product from
> > > > > > > the ancient Freescale v3.14 kernel to the latest mainline and pushing
> > > > > > > any needed changes upstream. The DT files for our imx6dl-yapp4 platform
> > > > > > > already made it into v5.1-rc.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I rebased and updated our mpr121 patch to the latest mainline.
> > > > > > > It is created as a separate driver, similarly to gpio_keys_polled.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The I2C device is quite susceptible to ESD. An ESD test quite often
> > > > > > > causes reset of the chip or some register randomly changes its value.
> > > > > > > The [PATCH 3/4] adds a write-through register cache. With the cache
> > > > > > > this state can be detected and the device can be re-initialied.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The main question is: Is there any chance that such a polled driver
> > > > > > > could be accepted? Is it correct to implement it as a separate driver
> > > > > > > or should it be done as an option in the existing driver? I can not
> > > > > > > really imagine how I would do that though..
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are also certain worries that the MPR121 chip may no longer be
> > > > > > > available in nonspecifically distant future. In case of EOL I will need
> > > > > > > to add a polled driver for an other touchkey chip. May it be already
> > > > > > > in mainline or a completely new one.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think that my addition of input_polled_dev was ultimately a wrong
> > > > > > thing to do. I am looking into enabling polling mode for regular input
> > > > > > devices as we then can enable polling mode in existing drivers.
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, that sounds good. Especially when one needs to switch from one chip
> > > > > to another that is already in tree, the need for a whole new polling
> > > > > driver is eliminated.
> > > >
> > > > Could you please try the patch below and see if it works for your use
> > > > case? Note that I have not tried running it, but it compiles so it must
> > > > be good ;)
> > >
> > > Hi Dmitry,
> > > Thank you very much for the patch!
> > > I gave it a shot and it seems you forgot to add the input-poller.h file
> > > to the patch.. it does not compile on my side :(
> >
> > Oops ;) Please see the updated patch below.
>
> Thank you, now it is (almost) good as you said :D
>
> > >
> > > > Input: add support for polling to input devices
> > > >
> > > > From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > Separating "normal" and "polled" input devices was a mistake, as often we want
> > > > to allow the very same device work on both interrupt-driven and polled mode,
> > > > depending on the board on which the device is used.
> > > >
> > > > This introduces new APIs:
> > > >
> > > > - input_setup_polling
> > > > - input_set_poll_interval
> > > > - input_set_min_poll_interval
> > > > - input_set_max_poll_interval
> > > >
> > > > These new APIs allow switching an input device into polled mode with sysfs
> > > > attributes matching drivers using input_polled_dev APIs that will be eventually
> > > > removed.
> > >
> > > After reading this I am not really sure what else needs to be done
> > > to test/use the poller. I suspect I need to modify the input device
> > > driver (mpr121_touchkey.c in my case) like this:
> > >
> > > If the interrupt gpio is not provided in DT, the device driver probe
> > > function should:
> > > - not request the threaded interrupt
> > > - call input_setup_polling and provide it with poll_fn
> > > Can the mpr_touchkey_interrupt function be used as is for this
> > > purpose? The only problem I see is it returns IRQ_HANDLED.
> >
> > I'd factor out code suitable for polling from mpr_touchkey_interrupt()
> > and then do
> >
> > static irqreturn_t mpr_touchkey_interrupt(...)
> > {
> > mpr_touchkey_report(...);
> > return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > }
> >
>
> Probably a trivial problem for experienced kernel hacker but I can not
> wrap my head around this - the interrupt handler takes the mpr121
> device id as an argument while the poller poll_fn takes struct input_dev.
>
> I fail to figure out how to get the device id from the input device.
>
> Here is what I have:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/mpr121_touchkey.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/mpr121_touchkey.c
> index e9ceaa16b46a..1124f77ee10a 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/keyboard/mpr121_touchkey.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/mpr121_touchkey.c
> @@ -54,6 +54,10 @@
> /* MPR121 has 12 keys */
> #define MPR121_MAX_KEY_COUNT 12
> +#define MPR121_POLL_INTERVAL 50
> +#define MPR121_MIN_POLL_INTERVAL 10
> +#define MPR121_MAX_POLL_INTERVAL 200
> +
> struct mpr121_touchkey {
> struct i2c_client *client;
> struct input_dev *input_dev;
> @@ -115,9 +119,12 @@ static struct regulator *mpr121_vdd_supply_init(struct device *dev)
> return vdd_supply;
> }
> -static irqreturn_t mpr_touchkey_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> +static void mpr_touchkey_report(struct input_dev *dev)
> {
> - struct mpr121_touchkey *mpr121 = dev_id;
> + /*
> + * TODO the input_dev dev needs to be converted to mpr121 device id.
> + */
> + struct mpr121_touchkey *mpr121 = /* TODO */;

Use input_set_drvdata() in probe() and you can do

struct mpr121_touchkey *mpr121 = input_get_drvdata(dev);

here.

> struct i2c_client *client = mpr121->client;
> struct input_dev *input = mpr121->input_dev;
> unsigned long bit_changed;
> @@ -127,14 +134,14 @@ static irqreturn_t mpr_touchkey_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> reg = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, ELE_TOUCH_STATUS_1_ADDR);
> if (reg < 0) {
> dev_err(&client->dev, "i2c read error [%d]\n", reg);
> - goto out;
> + return;
> }
> reg <<= 8;
> reg |= i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, ELE_TOUCH_STATUS_0_ADDR);
> if (reg < 0) {
> dev_err(&client->dev, "i2c read error [%d]\n", reg);
> - goto out;
> + return;
> }
> reg &= TOUCH_STATUS_MASK;
> @@ -155,8 +162,17 @@ static irqreturn_t mpr_touchkey_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> }
> input_sync(input);
> +}
> +
> +static irqreturn_t mpr_touchkey_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> +{
> + /*
> + * TODO
> + * mpr_touchkey_report takes struct input_dev as an argument,
> + * not the device id.
> + */

struct mpr121_touchkey *mpr121 = dev_id;

mpr_touchkey_report(mpr121->input);

> + mpr_touchkey_report(/* TODO */);
> -out:
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
> @@ -232,11 +248,6 @@ static int mpr_touchkey_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> int error;
> int i;
> - if (!client->irq) {
> - dev_err(dev, "irq number should not be zero\n");
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> -
> vdd_supply = mpr121_vdd_supply_init(dev);
> if (IS_ERR(vdd_supply))
> return PTR_ERR(vdd_supply);
> @@ -289,13 +300,27 @@ static int mpr_touchkey_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> return error;
> }
> - error = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, client->irq, NULL,
> - mpr_touchkey_interrupt,
> - IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING | IRQF_ONESHOT,
> - dev->driver->name, mpr121);
> - if (error) {
> - dev_err(dev, "Failed to register interrupt\n");
> - return error;
> + if (client->irq) {
> + error = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, client->irq, NULL,
> + mpr_touchkey_interrupt,
> + IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING |
> + IRQF_ONESHOT,
> + dev->driver->name, mpr121);
> + if (error) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to register interrupt\n");
> + return error;
> + }
> + } else {
> + dev_dbg(dev, "invalid IRQ number, using polling mode\n");

I think it would be better if we checked if poll interval device
property is present before setting polling mode, so that polling mode is
not activated simply because someone forgot to add interrupt
specification.

> + error = input_setup_polling(input_dev, mpr_touchkey_report);
> + if (error)
> + return error;
> +
> + input_set_poll_interval(input_dev, MPR121_POLL_INTERVAL);
> + input_set_min_poll_interval(input_dev,
> + MPR121_MIN_POLL_INTERVAL);
> + input_set_max_poll_interval(input_dev,
> + MPR121_MAX_POLL_INTERVAL);
> }
> error = input_register_device(input_dev);
> --

Thanks.

--
Dmitry

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-27 09:39    [W:0.062 / U:6.792 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site