Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.0 238/246] Input: soc_button_array - fix mapping of the 5th GPIO in a PNP0C40 device
Date:   Thu,  4 Apr 2019 10:48:58 +0200
Message-Id: <20190404084627.626147874@linuxfoundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20190404084619.236418459@linuxfoundation.org>
References: <20190404084619.236418459@linuxfoundation.org>
User-Agent: quilt/0.65
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

5.0-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

[ Upstream commit e9eb788f9442d1b5d93efdb30c3be071ce8a22b1 ]

The Microsoft documenation for the PNP0C40 device aka the
"Windows-compatible button array" describes the 5th GpioInt listed in
the resources as: '5. Interrupt corresponding to the "Rotation Lock"
button, if supported'.

Notice this describes the 5th entry as a button while we sofar have been
mapping it to EV_SW, SW_ROTATE_LOCK. On my Point of View TAB P1006W-232
which actually comes with a rotation-lock button, the button indeed is a
button and not a slider/switch. An image search for other Windows tablets
has found 2 more models with a rotation-lock button and on both of those
it too is a push-button and not a slider/switch.

Further evidence can be found in the HUT extension HUTRR52 from Microsoft
which adds rotation lock support to the HUT, which describes 2 different
usages: "0xC9 System Display Rotation Lock Button" and
"0xCA System Display Rotation Lock Slider Switch" note that switch is seen
as a separate thing here and the non switch wording is an exact match for
the "Windows-compatible button array" spec wording.

TL;DR: our current mapping of the 5th GPIO to SW_ROTATE_LOCK is wrong
because the 5th GPIO is for a push-button not a switch.

This commit fixes this by maping the 5th GPIO to KEY_ROTATE_LOCK_TOGGLE.

Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
 drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
index 23520df7650f..55cd6e0b409c 100644
--- a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
+++ b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
@@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ static struct soc_button_info soc_button_PNP0C40[] = {
 	{ "home", 1, EV_KEY, KEY_LEFTMETA, false, true },
 	{ "volume_up", 2, EV_KEY, KEY_VOLUMEUP, true, false },
 	{ "volume_down", 3, EV_KEY, KEY_VOLUMEDOWN, true, false },
-	{ "rotation_lock", 4, EV_SW, SW_ROTATE_LOCK, false, false },
+	{ "rotation_lock", 4, EV_KEY, KEY_ROTATE_LOCK_TOGGLE, false, false },
 	{ }
 };
 
-- 
2.19.1