On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:49:49AM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:30:35AM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 04:19:10PM -0800, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > At present I am using the uevent in the userspace to infer > > > the Presence of a port on the remote end through the > > > appearance of usbc*-partner. > > > > > > Userspace uses this info to decide on when to show a USB > > > notification on the screen and what should be the options > > > provided in the dialog. > > > > > > I was assuming that this is not something that would be dropped. > > > > > > Coding using events was relatively easier to program from userspace .. > > > > > > Is it possible to use POLL for identifying the appearance of port partner > > > ? > > > I did not notice sysfs_notify call in typec_connect/typec_disconnect. > > > > > > It would also be nice to have uevent notifications when the contents > > > of current_data_role or current_power_role changes. > > > > > > Is that too costly to have ? > > > > Greg, could you give your opinion. In this case we do have attribute > > files that the user space can poll. Data role is the USB data role, so > > host or device, and it can change for example if the partner executes > > a swap. The same can happen with the power role. > > So the same 'struct device' switches roles and attribute files are > updated that need to be re-read? If so, yes KOBJ_CHANGE is correct, if > a struct device is added/removed for this, then no, it doesn't make > sense.
OK, I'll add KOBJ_CHANGE for those. So is it OK to everybody if I remove the KOBJ_CHANGE in typec_connect()? We will see uevent KOBJ_ADD since the partner (or cable) is added in any case. Badhri, Oliver? Thanks, -- heikki -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
