Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] dt-bindings: connector: add typec-power-opmode property to usb-connector | From | Amelie DELAUNAY <> | Date | Mon, 9 Nov 2020 16:54:42 +0100 |
| |
On 11/9/20 4:03 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 10:58 AM Amelie Delaunay <amelie.delaunay@st.com> wrote: >> >> Power operation mode may depends on hardware design, so, add the optional >> property typec-power-opmode for usb-c connector to select the power >> operation mode capability. >> >> Signed-off-by: Amelie Delaunay <amelie.delaunay@st.com> >> --- >> Hi Bahdri, Rob, >> >> I've added the exlusion with FRS property, but new FRS property name >> should be use here so, be careful. >> >> --- >> .../bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml | 24 +++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml >> index 62781518aefc..a84464b3e1f2 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml >> @@ -93,6 +93,24 @@ properties: >> - device >> - dual >> >> + typec-power-opmode: >> + description: Determines the power operation mode that the Type C connector >> + will support and will advertise through CC pins when it has no power >> + delivery support. >> + - "default" corresponds to default USB voltage and current defined by the >> + USB 2.0 and USB 3.2 specifications, 5V 500mA for USB 2.0 ports and >> + 5V 900mA or 1500mA for USB 3.2 ports in single-lane or dual-lane >> + operation respectively. >> + - "1.5A" and "3.0A", 5V 1.5A and 5V 3.0A respectively, as defined in USB >> + Type-C Cable and Connector specification, when Power Delivery is not >> + supported. >> + allOf: >> + - $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#definitions/string >> + enum: >> + - default >> + - 1.5A >> + - 3.0A > > Use the enums here. Unless you want to define it as actual current as > a numerical value.
If I understand your point correctly, I think I should remove allOf here and stick with what is done to describe power-role and data-role property. Right ?
Regards, Amelie > > Rob >
| |