Hi Prashant, On 15/9/20 17:34, Prashant Malani wrote: > HI Enric, > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 5:48 AM Enric Balletbo i Serra > <enric.balle...@collabora.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Stephen, Prashant, >> >> On 9/9/20 6:04, Stephen Boyd wrote: >>> Let's try to read more information out of more modern cros_ec devices by >>> using the v2 format first and then fall back to the v1 format. This >>> gives us more information about things such as DP mode of the typec pins >>> and the CC state, along with some more things. >>> >>> Cc: Gwendal Grignou <gwen...@chromium.org> >>> Cc: Prashant Malani <pmal...@chromium.org> >>> Cc: Guenter Roeck <gro...@chromium.org> >>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <swb...@chromium.org> >>> --- >>> >> >> I saw some discussion going on in gerrit (a pity the discussion didn't >> happen in >> mainline) Did you end with a conclusion? Can I remove this patch from my >> backlog? > > My apologies for not posting the comment here. > To summarize: the userspace EC utility ectool [1] can offer the > equivalent output, but with better formatting. So I believe the > decision is to use that instead of this patch. > I also posed a counter-question: can we remove this debugfs pdinfo > file entirely, since we can pull this information using ectool? >
If I am not mistaken pdinfo is used by your userspace, so, assuming we don't break (or we have a plan to not break) things I'm fine with it. In general, delegating things to userspace and get rid of kernel code is good for everyone. Thanks, Enric > [1]: > https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/ec/+/refs/heads/master/util/ectool.c > > Best regards, >
