Re: [RFC PATCHv2] usb: USB Type-C Connector Class

[Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>]

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 07:59:57AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 04:20:56PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 17:04 +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > 
> > > I'm not against leaving the responsibility of registering the alternate
> > > modes to the drivers. I'm a little bit worried about relying then on
> > > the drivers to also handle the unregistering accordingly, but I can
> > > live with that. But we just shouldn't share the responsibility of
> > > un/registering them between the class and the drivers, so the driver
> > > should then handle the registration always.
> > > 
> > > Oliver, what do you think?
> > 
> > Either will do for me. Registration by the drivers is a bit better.
> > But it has to be the one or the other. Mixing is indeed bad.
> > 
> Same here. I don't have any problems handling unregistering
> from the driver. I just have to keep track of the state and call
> typec_unregister_altmodes() before calling typec_disconnect().
> 
> Having to wait for mode discovery to complete before calling
> typec_connect() is much more complicated, at least with my current
> code.

OK, so we'll change this and make the driver take care of the
registration.


-- 
heikki