From: Jan Remmet <hidden> Date: 2026-01-23 14:53:13
For systems where the ID pin isn't available as gpio use the ATTACHED_STATE
register instead to control vbus.
From the datasheet:
"This is an additional method to communicate attach other
than the ID pin. These bits can be read by the application to
determine what was attached."
Use this method if id-gpios property is not set, but the connector node
has vbus-supply defined.
Check regulator state as peripheral and detach can disable vbus.
Signed-off-by: Jan Remmet <redacted>
---
Changes in v2:
- Added check if regulator is already disabled. As detach and
peripheral mode cause an interrupt.
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260115-wip-jremmet-hd3ss3220_vbus-v1-1-b7d9adfbe346@phytec.de
---
drivers/usb/typec/hd3ss3220.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 03:52:37PM +0100, Jan Remmet wrote:
For systems where the ID pin isn't available as gpio use the ATTACHED_STATE
register instead to control vbus.
quoted
From the datasheet:
"This is an additional method to communicate attach other
than the ID pin. These bits can be read by the application to
determine what was attached."
Use this method if id-gpios property is not set, but the connector node
has vbus-supply defined.
Check regulator state as peripheral and detach can disable vbus.
Signed-off-by: Jan Remmet <redacted>
---
Changes in v2:
- Added check if regulator is already disabled. As detach and
peripheral mode cause an interrupt.
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260115-wip-jremmet-hd3ss3220_vbus-v1-1-b7d9adfbe346@phytec.de
---
drivers/usb/typec/hd3ss3220.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
Does not apply against my tree, what did you make it against? Can you
redo this against linux-next and resend?
thanks,
greg k-h
From: Jan Remmet <hidden> Date: 2026-01-26 08:05:01
Am 23.01.26 um 17:19 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman:
Does not apply against my tree, what did you make it against? Can you
redo this against linux-next and resend?
This is strange. I created it against 944aacb68baf (something after
v6.19-rc5). I can cleanly rebase it to next-20260123 without changes.
Do I miss something?
Jan
On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 08:04:58AM +0000, Jan Remmet wrote:
Am 23.01.26 um 17:19 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman:
quoted
Does not apply against my tree, what did you make it against? Can you
redo this against linux-next and resend?
This is strange. I created it against 944aacb68baf (something after
v6.19-rc5). I can cleanly rebase it to next-20260123 without changes.
Do I miss something?
Probably other changes to this file since then? linux-next will include
the USB development tree that has the work of everyone else in it that
will go into the next release.
Try rebasing and see what happens :)
thanks,
greg k-h
From: Jan Remmet <hidden> Date: 2026-01-26 10:32:43
Am 26.01.26 um 10:05 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 08:04:58AM +0000, Jan Remmet wrote:
quoted
Am 23.01.26 um 17:19 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman:
quoted
Does not apply against my tree, what did you make it against? Can you
redo this against linux-next and resend?
This is strange. I created it against 944aacb68baf (something after
v6.19-rc5). I can cleanly rebase it to next-20260123 without changes.
Do I miss something?
Probably other changes to this file since then? linux-next will include
the USB development tree that has the work of everyone else in it that
will go into the next release.
I saw on usb-next my v1 is already applied. After removing it, it
applies well. Sorry for the late change on this patch.
Jan
Try rebasing and see what happens :)
thanks,
greg k-h
On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 10:32:40AM +0000, Jan Remmet wrote:
Am 26.01.26 um 10:05 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman:
quoted
On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 08:04:58AM +0000, Jan Remmet wrote:
quoted
Am 23.01.26 um 17:19 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman:
quoted
Does not apply against my tree, what did you make it against? Can you
redo this against linux-next and resend?
This is strange. I created it against 944aacb68baf (something after
v6.19-rc5). I can cleanly rebase it to next-20260123 without changes.
Do I miss something?
Probably other changes to this file since then? linux-next will include
the USB development tree that has the work of everyone else in it that
will go into the next release.
I saw on usb-next my v1 is already applied. After removing it, it
applies well. Sorry for the late change on this patch.
I can't remove a patch from the tree, if there is something different
here, please send a new "fix up" patch for that.
thanks,
greg k-h