From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1425484AbcBRLFx (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2016 06:05:53 -0500 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:26963 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1425249AbcBRLFv (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2016 06:05:51 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,464,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="654941187" Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 13:05:43 +0200 From: Heikki Krogerus To: Rajaram R Cc: Greg KH , "linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mathias Nyman , Felipe Balbi Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] usb: USB Type-C Class and driver for UCSI Message-ID: <20160218110543.GE1859@kuha.fi.intel.com> References: <1455037283-106479-1-git-send-email-heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Rajaram, On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 01:04:48AM +0530, Rajaram R wrote: > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Heikki Krogerus > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > The OS, or more precisely the user space, needs to be able to control > > a few things regarding USB Type-C ports. The first thing that must be > > allowed to be controlled is the data role. USB Type-C ports will > > select the data role randomly with DRP ports. When USB PD is > > supported, also independent (from data role) power role swapping can > > be supported together with Alternate Mode control. > > > > I'm proposing with this set a Class for the Type-C connectors that > > gives the user space control over those things on top of getting basic > > details about the USB Type-C connectors and also partners. The details > > include the capabilities of the port, the supported data and power > > roles, supported accessories (audio and debug), supported Alternate > > Modes, USB PD support and of course the type of the partner (USB, Alt > > Mode, Accessory or Charger), and more or less the same details about > > the partner. > > > > I'm not considering cables with this Class, and I have deliberately > > Since we have capability details of ports in user space, I believe > cable capability is also necessary for policy decision(power, alt > mode). Is that something we are cautiously leaving out ? pls explain Adding the cable control to this interface will make it more complex from users perspective. However, nothing forces the user to control also the cable. I already decided to add vconn_swap support, so I'll try to add cable alt mode control and capabilities as well. Thanks, -- heikki