Hi,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>>>>>> For supporting the usb charger, it adds the usb_charger_init() and
>>>>>>>>> usb_charger_exit() functions for usb charger initialization and exit.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It will report to the usb charger when the gadget state is changed,
>>>>>>>>> then the usb charger can do the power things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Li Jun <jun.li@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>>> Tested-by: Li Jun <jun.li@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Before anything, I must say that I really liked this patch. It's
>>>>>>>> minimaly invasive to udc core and does all the necessary changes. If it
>>>>>>>> wasn't for the extra charger class, this would've been perfect.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can't you just tie a charger to a UDC and avoid the charger class
>>>>>>>> completely?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> static inline int usb_gadget_vbus_draw(struct usb_gadget *gadget, unsigned mA)
>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>> + if (gadget->charger)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I guess you could do this check inside
>>>>>>>> usb_gadget_set_cur_limit_by_type() itself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We will access the 'gadget->charger->type' member when issuing
>>>>>>> usb_gadget_set_cur_limit_by_type(), so I think I should leave the
>>>>>>> check here in next new version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's what I mean:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int usb_charger_set_cur_limit(struct usb_gadget *gadget, unsigned int mA)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct usb_charger *charger;
>>>>>> enum usb_charger_type type;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if (!gadget->charger)
>>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> charger = gadget->charger;
>>>>>> type = charger->type;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> return __usb_charger_set_cur_limit(charger, type, mA);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> But that means we need to export both 'usb_charger_set_cur_limit()'
>>>>> function and '__usb_charger_set_cur_limit()' function in charger.c
>>>>> file. Cause some user may want to set the current limitation by one
>>>>> charger type parameter (may be not from charger->type), like by
>>>>> issuing '__usb_charger_set_cur_limit(charger, SDP_TYPE, mA)'. How do
>>>>> you think about this situation? Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> if we have that requirement, that's totally fine. Just rename
>>>> __usb_charger_set_cur_limit() back to
>>>> _usb_charger_set_cur_limit_by_type() and expose both. But
>>>> set_cur_limit_by_type can assume its arguments are valid at all times.
>>>
>>> Make sense. I'll fix this issue in v14 version. Thanks.
>>
>> there's one thing bothering me though:
>>
>> gadget->charger is supposed to be "current detected charger" right? If
>> we have a single port tied to a single charger, in which case would we
>> *ever* need to change current limit of any charger type other than
>> "current charger" ?
>
> What I mean is user can set the current limit by charger type as what
> they want at initial stage. As we know the default current of SDP (not
> super speed) is 500 mA, but user can set the current limit of SDP as
> 450 mA if there are some special on their own platform by issuing
> '__usb_charger_set_cur_limit(charger, SDP_TYPE, 450)'.
Oh I see. Odd, but okay
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
