Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/8] platform/x86: intel_cht_int33fe: Remove connection for the alt mode mux | From | Hans de Goede <> | Date | Thu, 31 Jan 2019 11:04:44 +0100 |
| |
Hi,
On 28-01-19 16:27, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 11:44:29AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 28-01-19 10:45, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 3:17 PM Heikki Krogerus >>> <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Driver for fusb302 does not support alternate modes, so the >>>> connection is not really needed for now. Removing that >>>> connection description allows us to improve the USB Type-C >>>> mux API. >>>> >>> >>> Acked-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> >>> supposed to go via USB tree. >> >> I missed the original posting of this, so let me reply here: >> >> Nack to this change, I've a patch-set in the works to >> make display-port over type-c work with 2 devices with a fusb302 >> mux and that needs this connection. > > I can add the connections back in this series after the API > modification patches, but should the connections be added back only > after we actually support the alt mode in the driver? > > Btw. I'm preparing patches where I remove struct tcpc_config > completely. We can do that by taking advantage of the software fwnodes > (I'll send the patches RFC to give you an idea what I'm talking about). > > That's related as we don't need struct tcpc_config for anything else > except for alternate modes (which no driver supports currently) after > that series, and even with the alt modes, it's only a question of > supplying DT bindings that define the appropriate device properties. > > Also, as a "heads-up": As I explained in the cover-letter, my plan is > to take advantage of the software fwnodes also with the connections. > By adding support for reference handling to the software nodes, we > don't need to maintain the list of connections as we do today. And > more importantly, we don't need to match using device names, which is > always fragile. > > That means we will change the connection registration, actually, > remove connection registration :-). The connections after that can > always be described in the fwnode for the device.
I see that you've posted a v2 series now and that you've kept the dev_name matching for platforms where there are no fwnodes to match on, thanks.
I've just reviewed the v2 series and it looks good to me, I will reply there.
Regards,
Hans
| |