On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 04:45:09PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 10:20:01PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > On Thu 2016-05-19 15:44:54, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > The purpose of this class is to provide unified interface for user > > > space to get the status and basic information about USB Type-C > > > Connectors in the system, control data role swapping, and when USB PD > > > is available, also power role swapping and Alternate Modes. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.kroge...@linux.intel.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/usb/Kconfig | 2 + > > > drivers/usb/Makefile | 2 + > > > drivers/usb/type-c/Kconfig | 7 + > > > drivers/usb/type-c/Makefile | 1 + > > > drivers/usb/type-c/typec.c | 957 > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > For consistency, should this be either type-c/type-c.c or > > typec/typec.c? > > For some reason I like to have the dash in the folder name, but I > don't like the idea that the port driver would be in form > type-c_something. I would prefer them to be named typec_something. Or > maybe just "something" and also name the typec.c maybe class.c or > core.c. > > Is this a big problem? I guess we could just name the folder "typec". > Guenter, whats your opinion? > I am fine either way.
Thanks, Guenter
