Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1612975 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] auxdisplay: Move panel.c to drivers/auxdisplay folder

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] auxdisplay: Move panel.c to drivers/auxdisplay  folder Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> - 2017-03-30 13:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] auxdisplay: Move panel.c to drivers/auxdisplay folder Willy TARREAU <wtarreau@haproxy.com> - 2017-03-30 15:00 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] auxdisplay: Move panel.c to drivers/auxdisplay  folder Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> - 2017-04-04 18:30 +0200

#1612975 — Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] auxdisplay: Move panel.c to drivers/auxdisplay folder

On Mon, 2017-03-27 at 11:01 +0200, Willy TARREAU wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:26:07AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Willy TARREAU <wtarreau@haproxy.co
> > m> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 04:19:43PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Andy Shevchenko
> > > > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 15:19 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Andy Shevchenko
> > > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> In fact here the output signals should be seen as a shared bus with
> multiple
> chip select signals. Note that in some designs it's even possible that
> pressing
> multiple buttons will cause crap to be sent to the LCD by short-
> circuiting
> the lines (if no diodes are used) but it might be acceptable for many
> designs,
> especially the DIY field where the principle is "don't do it".

So, summarizing the comments are we okay to proceed or there is a clear
objection?

P.S. Note, that there is at least one driver under drivers/auxdisplay
which supports key buttons.

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1613039 — Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] auxdisplay: Move panel.c to drivers/auxdisplay folder

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:27:06PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-03-27 at 11:01 +0200, Willy TARREAU wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:26:07AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Willy TARREAU <wtarreau@haproxy.co
> > > m> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 04:19:43PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Andy Shevchenko
> > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 15:19 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Andy Shevchenko
> > > > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > In fact here the output signals should be seen as a shared bus with
> > multiple
> > chip select signals. Note that in some designs it's even possible that
> > pressing
> > multiple buttons will cause crap to be sent to the LCD by short-
> > circuiting
> > the lines (if no diodes are used) but it might be acceptable for many
> > designs,
> > especially the DIY field where the principle is "don't do it".
> 
> So, summarizing the comments are we okay to proceed or there is a clear
> objection?

I don't know all the impacts, but as long as it continues to work I'm
totally fine with seeing the code being changed and refactored. It
already got a nice improvement with this series. Furthermore I can
occasionally give it a try if that helps :-)

Willy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1616196

On Thu, 2017-03-30 at 14:54 +0200, Willy TARREAU wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:27:06PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, 2017-03-27 at 11:01 +0200, Willy TARREAU wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:26:07AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Willy TARREAU <wtarreau@haprox
> > > > y.co
> > > > m> wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 04:19:43PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Andy Shevchenko
> > > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 15:19 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Andy Shevchenko
> > > > > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > In fact here the output signals should be seen as a shared bus
> > > with
> > > multiple
> > > chip select signals. Note that in some designs it's even possible
> > > that
> > > pressing
> > > multiple buttons will cause crap to be sent to the LCD by short-
> > > circuiting
> > > the lines (if no diodes are used) but it might be acceptable for
> > > many
> > > designs,
> > > especially the DIY field where the principle is "don't do it".
> > 
> > So, summarizing the comments are we okay to proceed or there is a
> > clear
> > objection?
> 
> I don't know all the impacts, but as long as it continues to work I'm
> totally fine with seeing the code being changed and refactored. It
> already got a nice improvement with this series. Furthermore I can
> occasionally give it a try if that helps :-)

It will.

I'm about to send v2 with tags applied so far.

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web