lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Nov]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATHCv10 1/2] usb: USB Type-C connector class
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 06:30:23AM -0800, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote:
> > IMHO the uevent is cheaper. User space cannot just poll without further
> > infrastructure. A task needs to run to poll. A uevent can be handled
> > through established infrastructure.
>
> Thanks Oliver for stating this. This is exactly what I was facing.
>
> > OK, I'll add KOBJ_CHANGE for those.
> >
> > So is it OK to everybody if I remove the KOBJ_CHANGE in
> > typec_connect()? We will see uevent KOBJ_ADD since the partner (or
> > cable) is added in any case. Badhri, Oliver?
>
> Yes Heikki.. That's OK for me as well.
> Just to get my understanding right. You are planning to add
> KOBJ_CHANGE uevents when current_power_role or
> current_data_role changes and KOBJ_ADD when new port-partner
> or the cable is attached. Is that right ?

Yes, though I don't KOBJ_ADD separately with the partners and cables.
That uevent is sent when the device for them is registered, so it's
already there.


Br,

--
heikki

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-11-16 15:48    [W:0.043 / U:0.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site