[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160310235716.GB2586@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 15:57:16 -0800
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>
Cc: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] usb: mux: add common code for Intel dual role
port mux
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 01:39:43PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-03-08 at 15:53 +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-platform b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-platform
> > index 5172a61..a2261cb 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-platform
> > +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-platform
> > @@ -18,3 +18,18 @@ Description:
> > devices to opt-out of driver binding using a driver_override
> > name such as "none". Only a single driver may be specified in
> > the override, there is no support for parsing delimiters.
> > +
> > +What: /sys/bus/platform/devices/.../intel_mux
>
> Hi,
>
> is there any reason to call this "intel_mux"? We want a common interface
> for such things. So how about "role_mux" or "master_slave_mux"?
I agree, don't make this intel specific, as it shouldn't be.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists