Re: [PATCH v8 1/4] power: supply: core: add quick charge type property

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 04:42:06PM +0800, Qiwu Huang wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 3:43 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 08:54:56AM +0800, Qiwu Huang wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 2:07 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 09:56:28AM +0800, Qiwu Huang wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 2:09 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 11:46:54AM +0800, Qiwu Huang wrote:
> > > > > > > From: Qiwu Huang <huangqiwu@xiaomi.com>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Reports the kind of quick charge type based on
> > > > > > > different adapter power.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Qiwu Huang <huangqiwu@xiaomi.com>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >  Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-power | 21 +++++++++
> > > > > > >  drivers/power/supply/power_supply_sysfs.c   |  1 +
> > > > > > >  drivers/power/supply/qcom_smbb.c            | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > > >  include/linux/power_supply.h                | 14 ++++++
> > > > > > >  4 files changed, 87 insertions(+)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You should also submit your driver that uses these new attributes at the
> > > > > > same time.  What happened to that request?  Otherwise no one really
> > > > > > knows how these are being used, or if they even are used by anyone.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think I can submit the whole driver because our drivers are
> > > > > divided into three parts, the first part is in ADSP, the second part
> > > > > is in kernel and the third part is in Android Hal.This is the second
> > > > > part.
> > > >
> > > > WHat is "ADSP"?
> > >
> > > ADSP: advanced digital signal processor
> >
> > Ok, then just send the kernel driver.
> >
> > > > Just submit your kernel driver code, that's all we care about here.
> > > > Userspace code is not anything we can do anything with :)
> > >
> > > If we ported the full driver, we would break the existing driver
> > > structure because we would introduce more Qualcomm code. I think
> > > that's an unreasonable change.
> >
> > That doesn't make much sense.  You have a working driver for these apis,
> > just submit it for inclusion, it should never break any existing
> > drivers, otherwise your code wouldn't work either.
> 
> We're an Android device, we're working on a Qualcomm based code, and
> from the current code tree, the current code tree is missing the QTI
> Charger code

I don't know what that means, sorry.  Just submit your driver, and any
needed dependencies as well.  There's no other way to evaluate this api
addition without that, right?

thanks,

greg k-h