extcon: intel-cht-wc: Report RID_A for ACA adapters

Make cht_wc_extcon_get_id() report RID_A for ACA adapters, instead of
reporting ID_FLOAT.

According to the spec. we should read the USB-ID pin ADC value
to determine the resistance of the used pull-down resister and
then return RID_A / RID_B / RID_C based on this. But all "Accessory
Charger Adapter"s (ACAs) which users can actually buy always use
a combination of a charging port with one or more USB-A ports, so
they should always use a resistor indicating RID_A. But the spec
is hard to read / badly-worded so some of them actually indicate
they are a RID_B ACA even though they clearly are a RID_A ACA.

To workaround this simply always return INTEL_USB_RID_A, which
matches all the ACAs which users can actually buy.

Acked-by: Chanwoo Choi <[e-mail]>
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[e-mail]>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel <[e-mail]>

drivers/extcon/extcon-intel-cht-wc.c

···
 		return INTEL_USB_ID_GND;
 	case CHT_WC_PWRSRC_RID_FLOAT:
 		return INTEL_USB_ID_FLOAT;
+	/*
+	 * According to the spec. we should read the USB-ID pin ADC value here
+	 * to determine the resistance of the used pull-down resister and then
+	 * return RID_A / RID_B / RID_C based on this. But all "Accessory
+	 * Charger Adapter"s (ACAs) which users can actually buy always use
+	 * a combination of a charging port with one or more USB-A ports, so
+	 * they should always use a resistor indicating RID_A. But the spec
+	 * is hard to read / badly-worded so some of them actually indicate
+	 * they are a RID_B ACA evnen though they clearly are a RID_A ACA.
+	 * To workaround this simply always return INTEL_USB_RID_A, which
+	 * matches all the ACAs which users can actually buy.
+	 */
 	case CHT_WC_PWRSRC_RID_ACA:
+		return INTEL_USB_RID_A;
 	default:
-		/*
-		 * Once we have IIO support for the GPADC we should read
-		 * the USBID GPADC channel here and determine ACA role
-		 * based on that.
-		 */
 		return INTEL_USB_ID_FLOAT;
 	}
 }