Mika Westerberg [off-list ref] writes:

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 12:05:57PM +0100, ext Ferenc Wagner wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

Or let for example -1 mean 0, which is ugly, to say the least.

How about adding (again) new field: bool custom_irqflags?

Thinking about it, since multiple buttons can share a single IRQ, this
can't be a per-button field after all.  Perhaps a better solution would
be adding a new mapping to the platform data:

struct gpio_keys_irq {
        int irq;
        int irqflags;
        int wakeup;                 /* replace the per-button field */
}

struct gpio_keys_platform_data {
        struct gpio_keys_button *buttons;
        int nbuttons;
        unsigned int rep:1;
        struct gpio_keys_irq *irqs; /* new member */
        int nirqs;                  /* new member */
};

OK. This seems reasonable.

But mind the comment below.

quoted

quoted

In our case, we only have 1:1 mapping between GPIO lines and buttons
so current version works but if there are any (possible) users for
this kind of setup I can implement it.

I quoted (and own) a platform with such arrangement.  I'm somewhat
short on time to work on this hobby project, but of course I don't
expect you to do the heavy lifting.  Unfortunately I haven't yet
managed to get a clear picture about how to properly attack it (the
problem is GPIO access from the IRQ handler, if you didn't read the
thread), so I couldn't produce acceptable code (even though in my
case gpio_get_value can't sleep, so I've got working code).
Meanwhile, I'm trying to do my best to not let things go in a
direction which makes this change harder that it currently is.  I'm
really sorry this hurts your efforts.

Thanks for clarifying things. It really don't hurt my efforts; I get
paid for doing this :)

So I'll try to implement this gpio-keys muting so that it allows
also multiple buttons to share single IRQ line.

Thanks.  But you'd better wait for Dmitry's response, because I'm by no
means authoritative in this business.
-- 
Regards,
Feri.