| Message ID | 20180913021113.18150-2-badhri@google.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/2] typec: tcpm: Do not disconnect link for self powered devices | expand |
Hello Badhri, On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 07:11:13PM -0700, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote: > During hard reset, TCPM turns off the charging path. > The spec provides an option for Sink to either drop to vSafe5V or vSafe0V. This doesn't make sense. By definition the sink isn't sourcing VBUS, so how can it control whether to allow the voltage to be 5V or 0V? > From USB_PD_R3_0 > 2.6.2 Sink Operation > .. > Serious errors are handled by Hard Reset Signaling issued by either Port > Partner. A Hard Reset: > resets protocol as for a Soft Reset but also returns the power supply to > USB Default Operation (vSafe0V or vSafe5V output) in order to protect the > Sink. I can see how the wording here "vSafe0V *or* vSafe5V" is misleading, as I think it actually is both. In later parts of the spec, the source's VBUS behavior is well defined in that it must first drop to vSafe0V and then return to vSafe5V. Please refer to section 7.1.5. > Add a config option to tcpc_dev and let the device specific driver decide > what needs to be done. > > Signed-off-by: Badhri Jagan Sridharan <Badhri@google.com> > --- > drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c | 7 ++++++- > include/linux/usb/tcpm.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c > index a4e0c027a2a9..350d1a7c4543 100644 > --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c > +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c > @@ -3269,7 +3269,12 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > case SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_OFF: > memset(&port->pps_data, 0, sizeof(port->pps_data)); > tcpm_set_vconn(port, false); > - tcpm_set_charge(port, false); > + if (port->tcpc->config->vsafe_5v_hard_reset) Therefore I think this config option doesn't make sense. > + tcpm_set_current_limit(port, > + tcpm_get_current_limit(port), > + 5000); But I do think this might still be useful at least in ensuring the sink returns to drawing only default power during the transition before re-establishing a contract. Given that the sink can't control when exactly VBUS will go to 0V, is it ok to call set_current_limit() even if VBUS is momentarily 0V, so at least it is in preparation for when VBUS turns back on? Or would it be safer to do it during the SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_ON state after we know VBUS is back to vSafe5V? > + else > + tcpm_set_charge(port, false); Regards, Jack
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:39 PM Jack Pham <jackp@codeaurora.org> wrote: > > Hello Badhri, > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 07:11:13PM -0700, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote: > > During hard reset, TCPM turns off the charging path. > > The spec provides an option for Sink to either drop to vSafe5V or vSafe0V. > > This doesn't make sense. By definition the sink isn't sourcing VBUS, so > how can it control whether to allow the voltage to be 5V or 0V? The way I understand it, this is for the current limits that can be set on the Sink side. During hard reset, sink has to fallback to VSafe5V or VSafe0V if higher pd contract was negotiated. > > > > From USB_PD_R3_0 > > 2.6.2 Sink Operation > > .. > > Serious errors are handled by Hard Reset Signaling issued by either Port > > Partner. A Hard Reset: > > resets protocol as for a Soft Reset but also returns the power supply to > > USB Default Operation (vSafe0V or vSafe5V output) in order to protect the > > Sink. > > I can see how the wording here "vSafe0V *or* vSafe5V" is misleading, as > I think it actually is both. In later parts of the spec, the source's > VBUS behavior is well defined in that it must first drop to vSafe0V > and then return to vSafe5V. Please refer to section 7.1.5. Yeah thats for the source. But for sink, Say if the source isnt PD, then, sink initiated hard resets happen during the connection. Sink would hard reset couple of times before deeming that the partner is non PD. When connected to Type-A ports/non-pd partner, vbus is not going to likely drop so there isnt a reason to setcharge to false or drop the input current limit. Do you agree ? > > > > Add a config option to tcpc_dev and let the device specific driver decide > > what needs to be done. > > > > Signed-off-by: Badhri Jagan Sridharan <Badhri@google.com> > > --- > > drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c | 7 ++++++- > > include/linux/usb/tcpm.h | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c > > index a4e0c027a2a9..350d1a7c4543 100644 > > --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c > > +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c > > @@ -3269,7 +3269,12 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > case SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_OFF: > > memset(&port->pps_data, 0, sizeof(port->pps_data)); > > tcpm_set_vconn(port, false); > > - tcpm_set_charge(port, false); > > + if (port->tcpc->config->vsafe_5v_hard_reset) > > Therefore I think this config option doesn't make sense. > > > + tcpm_set_current_limit(port, > > + tcpm_get_current_limit(port), > > + 5000); > > But I do think this might still be useful at least in ensuring the sink > returns to drawing only default power during the transition before > re-establishing a contract. Given that the sink can't control when > exactly VBUS will go to 0V, is it ok to call set_current_limit() even if > VBUS is momentarily 0V, so at least it is in preparation for when VBUS > turns back on? Or would it be safer to do it during the > SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_ON state after we know VBUS is back to vSafe5V? IMHO Doing it in SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_ON makes more sense when vsafe_5v_hard_reset is not set. > > > > + else > > + tcpm_set_charge(port, false); > > Regards, > Jack > -- > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
+ Guenter On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 6:43 AM Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@google.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:39 PM Jack Pham <jackp@codeaurora.org> wrote: > > > > Hello Badhri, > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 07:11:13PM -0700, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote: > > > During hard reset, TCPM turns off the charging path. > > > The spec provides an option for Sink to either drop to vSafe5V or vSafe0V. > > > > This doesn't make sense. By definition the sink isn't sourcing VBUS, so > > how can it control whether to allow the voltage to be 5V or 0V? > > The way I understand it, this is for the current limits that can be > set on the Sink side. > During hard reset, sink has to fallback to VSafe5V or VSafe0V if > higher pd contract was negotiated. > > > > > > > > From USB_PD_R3_0 > > > 2.6.2 Sink Operation > > > .. > > > Serious errors are handled by Hard Reset Signaling issued by either Port > > > Partner. A Hard Reset: > > > resets protocol as for a Soft Reset but also returns the power supply to > > > USB Default Operation (vSafe0V or vSafe5V output) in order to protect the > > > Sink. > > > > I can see how the wording here "vSafe0V *or* vSafe5V" is misleading, as > > I think it actually is both. In later parts of the spec, the source's > > VBUS behavior is well defined in that it must first drop to vSafe0V > > and then return to vSafe5V. Please refer to section 7.1.5. > > > Yeah thats for the source. But for sink, Say if the source isnt PD, then, > sink initiated hard resets happen during the connection. Sink would hard reset > couple of times before deeming that the partner is non PD. When connected > to Type-A ports/non-pd partner, vbus is not going to likely drop so there isnt > a reason to setcharge to false or drop the input current limit. Do you agree ? > > > > > > > > Add a config option to tcpc_dev and let the device specific driver decide > > > what needs to be done. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Badhri Jagan Sridharan <Badhri@google.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c | 7 ++++++- > > > include/linux/usb/tcpm.h | 1 + > > > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c > > > index a4e0c027a2a9..350d1a7c4543 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c > > > +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c > > > @@ -3269,7 +3269,12 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > case SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_OFF: > > > memset(&port->pps_data, 0, sizeof(port->pps_data)); > > > tcpm_set_vconn(port, false); > > > - tcpm_set_charge(port, false); > > > + if (port->tcpc->config->vsafe_5v_hard_reset) > > > > Therefore I think this config option doesn't make sense. > > > > > + tcpm_set_current_limit(port, > > > + tcpm_get_current_limit(port), > > > + 5000); > > > > But I do think this might still be useful at least in ensuring the sink > > returns to drawing only default power during the transition before > > re-establishing a contract. Given that the sink can't control when > > exactly VBUS will go to 0V, is it ok to call set_current_limit() even if > > VBUS is momentarily 0V, so at least it is in preparation for when VBUS > > turns back on? Or would it be safer to do it during the > > SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_ON state after we know VBUS is back to vSafe5V? > > IMHO Doing it in SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_ON makes more sense when > vsafe_5v_hard_reset > is not set. > > > > > > > > + else > > > + tcpm_set_charge(port, false); > > > > Regards, > > Jack > > -- > > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 6:43 AM Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@google.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:39 PM Jack Pham <jackp@codeaurora.org> wrote: > > > > Hello Badhri, > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 07:11:13PM -0700, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote: > > > During hard reset, TCPM turns off the charging path. > > > The spec provides an option for Sink to either drop to vSafe5V or vSafe0V. > > > > This doesn't make sense. By definition the sink isn't sourcing VBUS, so > > how can it control whether to allow the voltage to be 5V or 0V? > > The way I understand it, this is for the current limits that can be > set on the Sink side. > During hard reset, sink has to fallback to VSafe5V or VSafe0V if > higher pd contract was negotiated. Ok, you are talking about sink current draw limits but vSafe{0,5}V are voltage definitions so these are orthogonal. Again, the sink can't directly dictate the voltage that's being sourced so I don't see how it has a choice here. If a PD contract was negotiated for greater than 5V and a hard reset happens then yes the voltage would fall to 0V and then rise back to 5V and during this time sink needs to draw appropriate current. > > > From USB_PD_R3_0 > > > 2.6.2 Sink Operation > > > .. > > > Serious errors are handled by Hard Reset Signaling issued by either Port > > > Partner. A Hard Reset: > > > resets protocol as for a Soft Reset but also returns the power supply to > > > USB Default Operation (vSafe0V or vSafe5V output) in order to protect the > > > Sink. > > > > I can see how the wording here "vSafe0V *or* vSafe5V" is misleading, as > > I think it actually is both. In later parts of the spec, the source's > > VBUS behavior is well defined in that it must first drop to vSafe0V > > and then return to vSafe5V. Please refer to section 7.1.5. > > > Yeah thats for the source. But for sink, Say if the source isnt PD, then, > sink initiated hard resets happen during the connection. Sink would hard reset > couple of times before deeming that the partner is non PD. When connected > to Type-A ports/non-pd partner, vbus is not going to likely drop so there isnt > a reason to setcharge to false or drop the input current limit. Do you agree ? Sure that makes sense. In this case I wonder if TCPM even needs to call set_charge(false) considering it does not yet know if the partner is PD capable or not. For sure, if the partner is PD capable and contract had been previously established, we'd definitely need to set_current_limit() to default levels and/or turn off charging. But in the case of hard reset attempts to try to determine if the source will send its capabilities (thereby being PD capable), wouldn't the initial default current limits still be in place? I think this is the point you're trying to make, that there is no need to disrupt charging if a hard reset is not going to cause VBUS to reset. To me it sounds like what you're trying to do makes sense only if you can make a run-time determination of a partner's PD capability, and not based on a config option. Thanks, Jack
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 10:07 AM Jack Pham <jackp@codeaurora.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 6:43 AM Badhri Jagan Sridharan > <badhri@google.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:39 PM Jack Pham <jackp@codeaurora.org> wrote: > > > > > > Hello Badhri, > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 07:11:13PM -0700, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote: > > > > During hard reset, TCPM turns off the charging path. > > > > The spec provides an option for Sink to either drop to vSafe5V or vSafe0V. > > > > > > This doesn't make sense. By definition the sink isn't sourcing VBUS, so > > > how can it control whether to allow the voltage to be 5V or 0V? > > > > The way I understand it, this is for the current limits that can be > > set on the Sink side. > > During hard reset, sink has to fallback to VSafe5V or VSafe0V if > > higher pd contract was negotiated. > > Ok, you are talking about sink current draw limits but vSafe{0,5}V are > voltage definitions so these are orthogonal. Again, the sink can't > directly dictate the voltage that's being sourced so I don't see how it > has a choice here. If a PD contract was negotiated for greater than 5V > and a hard reset happens then yes the voltage would fall to 0V and then > rise back to 5V and during this time sink needs to draw appropriate > current. > > > > > From USB_PD_R3_0 > > > > 2.6.2 Sink Operation > > > > .. > > > > Serious errors are handled by Hard Reset Signaling issued by either Port > > > > Partner. A Hard Reset: > > > > resets protocol as for a Soft Reset but also returns the power supply to > > > > USB Default Operation (vSafe0V or vSafe5V output) in order to protect the > > > > Sink. > > > > > > I can see how the wording here "vSafe0V *or* vSafe5V" is misleading, as > > > I think it actually is both. In later parts of the spec, the source's > > > VBUS behavior is well defined in that it must first drop to vSafe0V > > > and then return to vSafe5V. Please refer to section 7.1.5. > > > > > > Yeah thats for the source. But for sink, Say if the source isnt PD, then, > > sink initiated hard resets happen during the connection. Sink would hard reset > > couple of times before deeming that the partner is non PD. When connected > > to Type-A ports/non-pd partner, vbus is not going to likely drop so there isnt > > a reason to setcharge to false or drop the input current limit. Do you agree ? > > Sure that makes sense. In this case I wonder if TCPM even needs to call > set_charge(false) considering it does not yet know if the partner is PD > capable or not. For sure, if the partner is PD capable and contract had > been previously established, we'd definitely need to set_current_limit() > to default levels and/or turn off charging. > > But in the case of hard reset attempts to try to determine if the source > will send its capabilities (thereby being PD capable), wouldn't the > initial default current limits still be in place? I think this is the > point you're trying to make, that there is no need to disrupt charging > if a hard reset is not going to cause VBUS to reset. Yes that's right ! I wasnt sure how to put that in words. Thanks for doing that ! You do concur right ? > > To me it sounds like what you're trying to do makes sense only if you > can make a run-time determination of a partner's PD capability, and not > based on a config option. Yes this should be possible. port->pd_capable already has that info. To sum it up: if the partner is pd capable, set charge to false in SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_OFF and readjust current limits to default in SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_ON and turn on charging. If partner is not pd capable, do not turn off charging nor adjust current limit as host port is not going to respond to hard reset. Does it make sense ? > > Thanks, > Jack > > -- > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Hi Badhri, On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 04:38:10PM -0700, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 10:07 AM Jack Pham <jackp@codeaurora.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 6:43 AM Badhri Jagan Sridharan > > > Yeah thats for the source. But for sink, Say if the source isnt PD, then, > > > sink initiated hard resets happen during the connection. Sink would hard reset > > > couple of times before deeming that the partner is non PD. When connected > > > to Type-A ports/non-pd partner, vbus is not going to likely drop so there isnt > > > a reason to setcharge to false or drop the input current limit. Do you agree ? > > > > Sure that makes sense. In this case I wonder if TCPM even needs to call > > set_charge(false) considering it does not yet know if the partner is PD > > capable or not. For sure, if the partner is PD capable and contract had > > been previously established, we'd definitely need to set_current_limit() > > to default levels and/or turn off charging. > > > > But in the case of hard reset attempts to try to determine if the source > > will send its capabilities (thereby being PD capable), wouldn't the > > initial default current limits still be in place? I think this is the > > point you're trying to make, that there is no need to disrupt charging > > if a hard reset is not going to cause VBUS to reset. > > Yes that's right ! I wasnt sure how to put that in words. Thanks for > doing that ! > You do concur right ? Yes. > > To me it sounds like what you're trying to do makes sense only if you > > can make a run-time determination of a partner's PD capability, and not > > based on a config option. > > Yes this should be possible. port->pd_capable already has that info. > > To sum it up: > if the partner is pd capable, set charge to false in SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_OFF and > readjust current limits to default in SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_ON and turn > on charging. > > If partner is not pd capable, do not turn off charging nor adjust > current limit as host port is > not going to respond to hard reset. > > Does it make sense ? Right, although the "not pd capable" path could also mean the partner is PD capable but it is not determined yet. For example: if a sink is connected to a PD source, established a contract, and the sink reboots and has to initialize TCPM again. Assuming the sink never disconnected from CC when rebooting, the source won't automatically re-send its Source Capabilities as it will still be in its previous state(*). The sink TCPM however would send a hard reset in order to try to (re)establish a contract, so here is where this path overlaps with the not-pd-capable case. In this case I think it might be proper to readjust current limits to default also unless it was already done earlier--I see it is done in tcpm_reset_port() and in SNK_DISCOVERY, so you might be covered here. The question I have is whether you still need to consider calling set_charge(false) for this example. (*) Just thought of one more thing, what if the previous contract was negotiated at greater than 5V VBUS? How does the sink TCPM handle setting charging parameters after a reboot but prior to hard reset? Jack
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 11:42 AM Jack Pham <jackp@codeaurora.org> wrote: > > Hi Badhri, > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 04:38:10PM -0700, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 10:07 AM Jack Pham <jackp@codeaurora.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 6:43 AM Badhri Jagan Sridharan > > > > Yeah thats for the source. But for sink, Say if the source isnt PD, then, > > > > sink initiated hard resets happen during the connection. Sink would hard reset > > > > couple of times before deeming that the partner is non PD. When connected > > > > to Type-A ports/non-pd partner, vbus is not going to likely drop so there isnt > > > > a reason to setcharge to false or drop the input current limit. Do you agree ? > > > > > > Sure that makes sense. In this case I wonder if TCPM even needs to call > > > set_charge(false) considering it does not yet know if the partner is PD > > > capable or not. For sure, if the partner is PD capable and contract had > > > been previously established, we'd definitely need to set_current_limit() > > > to default levels and/or turn off charging. > > > > > > But in the case of hard reset attempts to try to determine if the source > > > will send its capabilities (thereby being PD capable), wouldn't the > > > initial default current limits still be in place? I think this is the > > > point you're trying to make, that there is no need to disrupt charging > > > if a hard reset is not going to cause VBUS to reset. > > > > Yes that's right ! I wasnt sure how to put that in words. Thanks for > > doing that ! > > You do concur right ? > > Yes. > > > > To me it sounds like what you're trying to do makes sense only if you > > > can make a run-time determination of a partner's PD capability, and not > > > based on a config option. > > > > Yes this should be possible. port->pd_capable already has that info. > > > > To sum it up: > > if the partner is pd capable, set charge to false in SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_OFF and > > readjust current limits to default in SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_ON and turn > > on charging. > > > > If partner is not pd capable, do not turn off charging nor adjust > > current limit as host port is > > not going to respond to hard reset. > > > > Does it make sense ? > > Right, although the "not pd capable" path could also mean the partner is > PD capable but it is not determined yet. For example: if a sink is > connected to a PD source, established a contract, and the sink reboots > and has to initialize TCPM again. Assuming the sink never disconnected > from CC when rebooting, the source won't automatically re-send its > Source Capabilities as it will still be in its previous state(*). The > sink TCPM however would send a hard reset in order to try to > (re)establish a contract, so here is where this path overlaps with the > not-pd-capable case. In this case I think it might be proper to readjust > current limits to default also unless it was already done earlier--I see > it is done in tcpm_reset_port() and in SNK_DISCOVERY, so you might be > covered here. Yes I verified this. > > The question I have is whether you still need to consider calling > set_charge(false) for this example. > > (*) Just thought of one more thing, what if the previous contract was > negotiated at greater than 5V VBUS? How does the sink TCPM handle > setting charging parameters after a reboot but prior to hard reset? Rebooting the device is an interesting case ! TCPM is unique in its own way as it neither a platform_driver nor a device_driver. Simply its the state machine of the type-c port's device. I see that I could register to the shutdown callback in the lower level driver which registers the port by calling tcpm_register_port and handle the shutdown operation by calling tcpm_unregister_port and subsequently opening the ports but dont know how to achiever this at the TCPM level. However, this reboot case is not directly related to the HARD_RESET state as this would have to be handled for all the sub states. Isn't that the case ? Updating the patchset to do the following: "if the partner is pd capable, set charge to false in SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_OFF and readjust current limits to default in SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_ON and turn on charging. If partner is not pd capable, do not turn off charging nor adjust current limit as host port is not going to respond to hard reset." > > Jack > -- > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c index a4e0c027a2a9..350d1a7c4543 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c @@ -3269,7 +3269,12 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) case SNK_HARD_RESET_SINK_OFF: memset(&port->pps_data, 0, sizeof(port->pps_data)); tcpm_set_vconn(port, false); - tcpm_set_charge(port, false); + if (port->tcpc->config->vsafe_5v_hard_reset) + tcpm_set_current_limit(port, + tcpm_get_current_limit(port), + 5000); + else + tcpm_set_charge(port, false); if (port->tcpc->config->self_powered) tcpm_set_roles(port, true, TYPEC_SINK, TYPEC_DEVICE); diff --git a/include/linux/usb/tcpm.h b/include/linux/usb/tcpm.h index 50c74a77db55..c6e3ccecba70 100644 --- a/include/linux/usb/tcpm.h +++ b/include/linux/usb/tcpm.h @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ struct tcpc_config { enum typec_role default_role; bool try_role_hw; /* try.{src,snk} implemented in hardware */ bool self_powered; /* port belongs to a self powered device */ + bool vsafe_5v_hard_reset; /* Maintain VSAFE5V during hard reset */ const struct typec_altmode_desc *alt_modes; };
During hard reset, TCPM turns off the charging path. The spec provides an option for Sink to either drop to vSafe5V or vSafe0V. From USB_PD_R3_0 2.6.2 Sink Operation .. Serious errors are handled by Hard Reset Signaling issued by either Port Partner. A Hard Reset: resets protocol as for a Soft Reset but also returns the power supply to USB Default Operation (vSafe0V or vSafe5V output) in order to protect the Sink. Add a config option to tcpc_dev and let the device specific driver decide what needs to be done. Signed-off-by: Badhri Jagan Sridharan <Badhri@google.com> --- drivers/usb/typec/tcpm.c | 7 ++++++- include/linux/usb/tcpm.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)