lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 10 Dec 2009 18:51:06 +0200
FromFelipe Balbi <>
SubjectRe: [PATCH] power_supply: Add driver for TWL4030/TPS65950 BCI charger
Hi,

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 03:44:11PM +0100, ext Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>Yep. The only thing I'm afraid of is that once the driver is in,
>then nobody will bother with improving it to do the right thing.
>But an imperfect driver is better than none.

I'm currently implementing the notifier part in a generic manner that
would handle all transceivers (well, they would have to provide a some
implementations for function pointers in struct otg_transceiver).

Then drivers like twl4030-bci and musb_hdrc could register for
notifications from the transceiver. I was thinking of notifying the
following events:

enum usb_xceiv_events {
USB_EVENT_NONE, /* no events or cable disconnected */
USB_EVENT_VBUS, /* vbus valid event */
USB_EVENT_ID, /* id was grounded */
USB_EVENT_CHARGER, /* usb dedicated charger */
USB_EVENT_ENUMERATED, /* gadget driver enumerated */
};
for the USB_EVENT_ENUMERATED we could also pass the bMaxPower (in mA)
field of the struct usb_configuration, then BCI (or bq24xxx for that
matter) can configure that as input current for charging.

USB_EVENT_ID is necessary because in most boards (at least the ones I've
seen) the charging chip (bq24xxx) also plays the role as charge pump,
sourcing vbus on OTG sessions.

USB_EVENT_VBUS and USB_EVENT_CHARGER aren't necessary on all cases, but
boards like RX-51 where it has a different transceiver for charger
detection, it's necessary to have those two separated.

If you guys have any comments already, please comment :-)

I'll try to finish a prototype by tomorrow and try to send it as RFC.
Will be sure to Cc you Anton.

--
balbi


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-10 17:55    [from the cache]
©2003-2010