On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 04:20:56PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 17:04 +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > I'm not against leaving the responsibility of registering the alternate > > modes to the drivers. I'm a little bit worried about relying then on > > the drivers to also handle the unregistering accordingly, but I can > > live with that. But we just shouldn't share the responsibility of > > un/registering them between the class and the drivers, so the driver > > should then handle the registration always. > > > > Oliver, what do you think? > > Either will do for me. Registration by the drivers is a bit better. > But it has to be the one or the other. Mixing is indeed bad. > Same here. I don't have any problems handling unregistering from the driver. I just have to keep track of the state and call typec_unregister_altmodes() before calling typec_disconnect(). Having to wait for mode discovery to complete before calling typec_connect() is much more complicated, at least with my current code. Guenter -- 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
