| Message ID | 20240418-fp3-vibra-v1-1-b636b8b3ff32@fairphone.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Enable vibrator on PMI632 + Fairphone 3 | expand |
On 18.04.2024 8:36 AM, Luca Weiss wrote: > Add a node for the vibrator module found inside the PMI632. > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@fairphone.com> > --- Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org> On a side note, this is a totally configuration-free peripheral that doesn't do anything crazy until manually configured. In the slow quest to be (hopefully) more sane about the defaults, should we keep them enabled by default? Bjorn? Konrad
On Thu Apr 18, 2024 at 12:01 PM CEST, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > On 18.04.2024 8:36 AM, Luca Weiss wrote: > > Add a node for the vibrator module found inside the PMI632. > > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@fairphone.com> > > --- > > Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org> > > On a side note, this is a totally configuration-free peripheral that doesn't do > anything crazy until manually configured. > > In the slow quest to be (hopefully) more sane about the defaults, should we keep > them enabled by default? Bjorn? But many (most?) devices don't have a vibration motor connected to PMI632, some (like devboards) don't have anything, and other phones have a separate chip that controls the vibration motor. Enabling this by default would mean all devices with PMI632 would get an input device for the vibrator that probably doesn't work? Regards Luca > > Konrad
On 4/18/24 12:03, Luca Weiss wrote: > On Thu Apr 18, 2024 at 12:01 PM CEST, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >> On 18.04.2024 8:36 AM, Luca Weiss wrote: >>> Add a node for the vibrator module found inside the PMI632. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@fairphone.com> >>> --- >> >> Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org> >> >> On a side note, this is a totally configuration-free peripheral that doesn't do >> anything crazy until manually configured. >> >> In the slow quest to be (hopefully) more sane about the defaults, should we keep >> them enabled by default? Bjorn? > > But many (most?) devices don't have a vibration motor connected to > PMI632, some (like devboards) don't have anything, and other phones have > a separate chip that controls the vibration motor. > > Enabling this by default would mean all devices with PMI632 would get an > input device for the vibrator that probably doesn't work? Fair Konrad
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi632.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi632.dtsi index 94d53b1cf6c8..b4313728f3e7 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi632.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi632.dtsi @@ -200,5 +200,11 @@ pmi632_lpg: pwm { status = "disabled"; }; + + pmi632_vib: vibrator@5700 { + compatible = "qcom,pmi632-vib"; + reg = <0x5700>; + status = "disabled"; + }; }; };
Add a node for the vibrator module found inside the PMI632. Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@fairphone.com> --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi632.dtsi | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)