Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] usb: typec: tcpm: Export partner Source Capabilities | From | Guenter Roeck <> | Date | Tue, 12 Feb 2019 08:19:56 -0800 |
| |
On 2/12/19 2:54 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 06:29:39PM +0800, Kyle Tso wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 3:02 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:54:11AM +0800, Kyle Tso wrote: >>>> Provide a function to get the partner Source Capabilities. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kyle Tso <kyletso@google.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> include/linux/usb/tcpm.h | 1 + >>>> 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c >>> b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c >>>> index f1d3e54210df..29cd84ba9960 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c >>>> @@ -4494,6 +4494,29 @@ int tcpm_update_sink_capabilities(struct >>> tcpm_port *port, const u32 *pdo, >>>> } >>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tcpm_update_sink_capabilities); >>>> >>>> +/* >>>> + * Don't call this function in interrupt context. Caller needs to free >>> the >>>> + * memory itself. >>>> + */ >>>> +int tcpm_get_partner_src_caps(struct tcpm_port *port, u32 **src_pdo) >>>> +{ >>>> + unsigned int nr_pdo; >>>> + >>>> + if (port->nr_source_caps == 0) >>>> + return -ENODATA; >>>> + >>>> + *src_pdo = kcalloc(port->nr_source_caps, sizeof(u32), GFP_KERNEL); >>>> + if (!src_pdo) >>>> + return -ENOMEM; >>>> + >>>> + mutex_lock(&port->lock); >>>> + nr_pdo = tcpm_copy_pdos(*src_pdo, port->source_caps, >>>> + port->nr_source_caps); >>>> + mutex_unlock(&port->lock); >>>> + return nr_pdo; >>>> +} >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tcpm_get_partner_src_caps); >>> >>> We don't add new functions that no one uses :( >>> >>> >> This function is useful if the PD Device Policy Manager is implemented >> outside of TCPM. >> In this situation, Device Policy Manager needs to know the partner >> capabilities to optimize >> the charging process. > > And where is that code? >
Agreed - that code should be sent upstream as well to let us see the entire context.
>> Take existing functions in TCPM for example: >> Function "tcpm_update_sink_capabilities" and >> "tcpm_update_source_capabilities" are exposed >> as well. And no one uses them now. > > Great, let's go delete them now, we should not have apis that no one > uses. This isn't a new thing... >
I sent a patch to do just that. Quite frankly I don't recal why I thought those functions might be needed.
Guenter
| |