HI,
On 07-09-18 18:19, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 05:06:12PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 06:35:12AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 09/07/2018 05:56 AM, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
Moving all the drivers that depend on the Port Controller
Manager under a new a new directory drivers/usb/typec/tcpci/
and making Guenter Roeck as the designated reviewer of that
code.
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.kroge...@linux.intel.com>
---
Hi guys,
This should be fairly trivial change. There is no functional effect.
Even menuconfig looks the same. The only interesting thing is that I'm
proposing that Guenter is marked as the reviewer/maintainer of all
TCPCI/TCPM drivers.
So Guenter, I guess the only question is that are you okay with this?
NP. I am not sure about the directory name, though. fusb and wcove don't
really support tcpci; only rt1711h does. The common denominator is really
the port manager (tcpm), not the port controller interface (tcpci).
As such, "typec port controller drivers" (without "interface") may be
a bit more appropriate.
Makes sense.
Not sure about the directory name, though. Maybe a simple "port" or
"controller" would do ? Or anything else that doesn't look like the
abbreviation for one of the supported protocols.
"port" maybe, but not controller. tps6598x.c is also a controller
driver, but it does not belong to that directory.
How about "phy"?
Maybe just use 'port'. Seems to me that 'phy' would not really be a good
match for the port manager (tcpm). 'phy' would still be better than tcpci,
though, so I am ok with it if others think it should be used.
I'm not a fan of phy, that makes me expect actual ethernet/sata/usb phy drivers,
which these or not.
Why not just use tcpm ? As Guenter said that is the common denominator.
Anyways this change is fine with me regardless of the name.
Regards,
Hans
