Anton, Could you please have a look at my comments below?
-jtc > > While I see nothing wrong with the patch itself, I beg you to send > > some users for the new calls. Don't be obsessed with the extcon > > internals too much, think more about how things will interact (i.e. I > > really really want to see how you use these calls from the power supply > drivers). > > The usage of extcon cable property is captured in patch > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/18/219 > This patch uses a extcon_dev callback function get_cable_properties() to get > the cable properties. As discussed in the previous mail thread, it may not be > good to have a extcon call back function since the extcon provider may not > be aware of the cable properties. This patch replaces the callback function > with an API, so that whoever knows the cable property, can set the property > using the extcon API extcon_cable_set_data(). > > The usage flow would be > 1)Consumer gets a notification from the extcon 2)consumer reads the > property using the API extcon_cable_get_data > > This way it doesn't mandatory for the extcon provider to give the cable > property. > Anyone who is aware of the cable property can set the cable property using > the API. > It makes the consumer and provider implementations very simple. > > With this new API, the callback function in patch > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/18/219 can be replaced by the API > extcon_cable_set_data(). N�����r��y����b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+����{����zX����ܨ}���Ơz�&j:+v�������zZ+��+zf���h���~����i���z� �w���?�����&�)ߢf��^jǫy�m��@A�a��� 0��h���i
