Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: input: gpio-keys: add pinctrl states

On 21/09/2026 21:35, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 12:24:32PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 16/09/2026 17:36, Markus Schneider-Pargmann wrote:

quoted

On Wed Sep 16, 2026 at 9:17 AM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Sep 15, 2026 at 12:41:03PM -0500, Kendall Willis wrote:

quoted

On 19:07-20260915, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 15/09/2026 19:05, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 15/09/2026 18:48, Kendall Willis wrote:

quoted

On 12:13-20260914, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On Sat, Sep 12, 2026 at 04:33:53PM -0500, Kendall Willis wrote:

quoted

Document pinctrl properties on the gpio-keys device node. By using the
wakeup pinctrl state, the pins are able to wakeup the system from a
low-power state. The default pinctrl state describes the default pin
configuration.

Signed-off-by: Kendall Willis <redacted>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/gpio-keys.yaml | 16 ++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/gpio-keys.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/gpio-keys.yaml
index cc78c2152921308fe0cad3e29ca78a5fad08f066..b554933e93412d8b6c2ec401dc1e1eeff57d4190 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/gpio-keys.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/gpio-keys.yaml

@@ -22,6 +22,22 @@ properties:
 
   poll-interval: true
 
+  pinctrl-0:
+    description: Default pinctrl state
+
+  pinctrl-1:
+    description: Wakeup pinctrl state
+
+  pinctrl-names:
+    description:
+      When present should contain at least "default" describing the default pin
+      states. The second state called "wakeup" describes the pins in their
+      wakeup configuration required to exit sleep states.
+    minItems: 1
+    items:
+      - const: default
+      - const: wakeup

This will introduce new warnings, which should be being fixed in this
patchset (e.g. at91-kizbox3-hs.dts).

Will fix the binding to work with current device trees.

quoted

But nevertheless, isn't second state the sleep state? How can you
configure pins for the wakeup state - like being in the wakeup? You
configure the pins for given state, which will be a system suspend, so
sleep?

The sleep state usually refers to putting the pins in a state to save
power. The wakeup pinctrl state is for putting the pins in a state to
allow wakeup from suspend for that device. Both 'sleep' and 'wakeup'
are for system suspend, but they fill different functions. The CAN
subsystem also uses the 'wakeup' state in addition to the 'sleep' state
[1].

So you mean sleep would be a separate state? But then aren't both
exactly the same states? IOW, if device is wakeup-source, it will have
for "sleep" state pin configuration allowing to wakeup.

The 'sleep' and 'wakeup' pin states are both used for suspend. They
would just be used separately since only one could be used at a time.
The reason 'wakeup' is separated out is because it is more specific for
allowing wakeup from the device.

If they cannot be used together, then it is the same state.

If I understand this patch correctly, 'sleep' is not relevant here.
But 'sleep' and 'wakeup' serve different purposes and can be
used/defined together in a single device in the devicetree:
 - 'sleep' describes the pin state during suspend if wakeup is not
   enabled by the user or there is no 'wakeup' pin state defined.
 - 'wakeup' describes the pin state during suspend if wakeup is enabled
   by the user.
If the user enables wakeup, 'wakeup' is the relevant state and otherwise
'sleep'. Which one applieas is a runtime decision of the the user.

I introduced these two states for m_can for that reason. This was
discussed here:
  https://lore.kernel.org/r/DCD1YPX4T779.ADK4JCGW1MU7@baylibre.com (local)

And then reviewed/applied in v10:
  https://lore.kernel.org/r/175993598226.3512549.5295923279078928995.robh@kernel.org (local)

So we seems to be discussing same issue again, because commit msg lacks
proper explanations.

The problem and difference here is that there is no sleep state.

Isn't there? 

Isn't. Quoting patch:

+    items:
+      - const: default
+      - const: wakeup

No sleep. :( So both the commit msg, rationale and could improve so we
won't be asking the same questions at v2.

The wakeup can be controlled from userspace and can't we
possible have 2 distinct pin control states, one for when a device is a
potential wakeup source, and another one when the device is in "off"
state while system is asleep?

Thanks.

Best regards,
Krzysztof