From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754646AbcEYOVB (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2016 10:21:01 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57306 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753174AbcEYOU7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2016 10:20:59 -0400 Message-ID: <1464186056.2132.12.camel@suse.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHv2] usb: USB Type-C Connector Class From: Oliver Neukum To: Heikki Krogerus Cc: Guenter Roeck , Andy Shevchenko , Rajaram R , Felipe Balbi , Mathias Nyman , Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 16:20:56 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20160525140429.GE27570@kuha.fi.intel.com> References: <1463661894-22820-1-git-send-email-heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com> <20160524192826.GA28453@roeck-us.net> <20160525115135.GD27570@kuha.fi.intel.com> <5745A6F2.6000406@roeck-us.net> <20160525140429.GE27570@kuha.fi.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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. Regards Oliver