On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Robert Baldyga <r.baldyga@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi David, > > On 02/19/2015 08:59 PM, David Cohen wrote: >> Some Intel platforms have an USB OTG port fully (or partially) >> controlled by GPIOs: >> >> (1) USB ID is connected directly to a pulled up GPIO. >> >> Optionally: >> (2) VBUS is enabled/disabled by a GPIO >> (3) Platform has 2 USB controllers connected to same port: one for >> device and one for host role. D+/- are switched between phys. >> according to this GPIO level. >> >> This driver configures USB OTG port for device or host role according to >> USB ID value. >> - If USB ID's GPIO level is low, OTG port is configured for host role >> by sourcing VBUS and switching D+/- to host phy. >> - If USB ID's GPIO level is high, by standard, the OTG port is >> configured for device role by not sourcing VBUS and switching D+/- to >> device controller. > > IMO it's not very elegant to handle VBUS power on/off in extcon driver. > Creating fixed regulator would allow to make VBUS handling more generic. IMHO it's just layers of abstraction piled on top of each other here. I would put this adjacent to the phy driver somewhere in drivers/usb/* and make the actual USB-driver thing handle its GPIOs directly. But I guess David and Felipe have already discussed that as we're seeing this patch? Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
