From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751487AbcFUMbt (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 08:31:49 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:15988 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751260AbcFUMbr (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 08:31:47 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,503,1459839600"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="722809783" From: Felipe Balbi To: Baolin Wang Cc: Greg KH , Sebastian Reichel , Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov , David Woodhouse , robh@kernel.org, Jun Li , Marek Szyprowski , Ruslan Bilovol , Peter Chen , Alan Stern , r.baldyga@samsung.com, grygorii.strashko@ti.com, Yoshihiro Shimoda , Lee Jones , Mark Brown , Charles Keepax , patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com, Linux PM list , USB , device-mainlining@lists.linuxfoundation.org, LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 2/4] gadget: Support for the usb charger framework In-Reply-To: References: <87bn2uomzd.fsf@linux.intel.com> <87twgmn4m7.fsf@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.22+51~gcc1a6d2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/25.0.93.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 15:27:19 +0300 Message-ID: <87inx2n2vs.fsf@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Baolin Wang writes: >> Baolin Wang writes: >>>> Can't you just tie a charger to a UDC and avoid the charger class >>>> completely? >>> >>> Yeah, I also hope so. But we really want something to manage the >>> charger devices, do you have any good suggestion to avoid the 'class' >>> but also can manage the charger devices? >> >> manage in what way? It seems to me that they don't need to be real >> devices, just a handle as part of struct usb_gadget, no? > > Although charger device is not one real hardware device, we also use > one 'struct device' to describe it in charger.c file. So we should > manage the 'struct device' with one proper way. that's fine, but why do you think they need a struct device to start with? =2D-=20 balbi --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXaTKnAAoJEIaOsuA1yqREu3IP/RTeVAjccVXE0sy8ytkYe34T 96oS0L/JtgY7QA6bt76k5ElkvYNd4GJ5GFhfOSJi3l7wWUBUZsEf55fQGofvpi+0 3yOHivEYBW62h4NSG4WCliwOhneSbAop+ILV7SIVuNeyhPXV7WTHbL3qEGwDGpnz nJT5DBtVYMk5ALOCJsY7LKBNzpxeHRTyDUYzEEkIPCWV2aF7vjmHqB3/dS7It9Wl 0wGXr1qZF0rTUuUXiAS+99G8nlGtBE+JAowA8pKQRg53oodbXPjZwLBEAYY0u4Ux lzXyPfBjbbnd2L797gE8aBYF1+ukX5deroDJIg+SD6o+R+rw2vwxMHGBCIkcMP8Z FuyLaZyMjeJKU/daK8thsLiUym5ODws3jPK9GZT0wT4nMMyR2qxUepRhajDA76mi UMoQ6cgIt/dTCCaFznFD0EdnivJP6EYvHczsGD818I5uqtG4p3ZoDh+b6uoYL238 HDEZ0gZphBIX94FJefyrYDzW71ivpHWiHN5X939IHC/pDUr8zQDSyUIlk+nsUc7T 8bjsm9IiL39RPMIpCT6hw7bYiORs/NXa4HuuXQmY2fK77+pNMtGgGpRv9H+MTFG1 75FKCO3NA3upoRIaYvFmdR6jMFX9g8qqc1Ky6JP40HQZGKbb9Yelv8KnmVL589RV gFOOJ/cl+awzU1zEkChN =LLYZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--