Re: [PATCH v2 11/14] power: supply: bq24190_charger: Get input_current_limit from our supplier

[Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@collabora.co.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2207 bytes --]

Hi,

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 01:53:24PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Thank you for your reviews / queuing!
> 
> On 29-08-17 13:40, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:04:59PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > On some devices the USB Type-C port power (USB PD 2.0) negotiation is
> > > done by a separate port-controller IC, while the current limit is
> > > controlled through another (charger) IC.
> > > 
> > > It has been decided to model this by modelling the external Type-C
> > > power brick (adapter/charger) as a power-supply class device which
> > > supplies the charger-IC, with its voltage-now and current-max representing
> > > the negotiated voltage and max current draw.
> > > 
> > > This commit adds support for this to the bq24190_charger driver by calling
> > > power_supply_set_input_current_limit_from_supplier helper if the
> > > "input-current-limit-from-supplier" device-property is set.
> > > 
> > > Note this replaces the functionality to get the current-limit from an
> > > extcon device, which will be removed in a follow-up commit.
> > 
> > I'm fine with the general approach, but ...
> > 
> > > [...]
> > > +	bdi->input_current_limit_from_supplier =
> > > +		device_property_read_bool(dev,
> > > +					  "input-current-limit-from-supplier");
> > > [...]
> > 
> > I wonder if we actually need this. I think we can just enable it
> > unconditionally when we have a parent power supply providing the
> > information.
> 
> I was thinking the same when implementing this, so this is fine with
> me. I think it is best to just unconditionally call
> power_supply_set_input_current_limit_from_supplier from the
> external_power_changed callback, that will only get called if we've
> a parent supply and that function will check that the parent has
> a current-max property itself.
> 
> Please let me know if just unconditionally calling
> power_supply_set_input_current_limit_from_supplier from the
> external_power_changed callback is ok with you then I will do that
> for v3 of the patch-set (from which I will drop the patches you've
> already queued).

Makes sense to me.

-- Sebastian

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]