> IMHO the uevent is cheaper. User space cannot just poll without further > infrastructure. A task needs to run to poll. A uevent can be handled > through established infrastructure.
Thanks Oliver for stating this. This is exactly what I was facing. > 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? Yes Heikki.. That's OK for me as well. Just to get my understanding right. You are planning to add KOBJ_CHANGE uevents when current_power_role or current_data_role changes and KOBJ_ADD when new port-partner or the cable is attached. Is that right ? Thanks, Badhri. On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 3:27 AM, Oliver Neukum <oneu...@suse.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2016-11-16 at 13:09 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > >> 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? > > OK by me. > > Regards > Oliver > > -- 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
