On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 09:28:32AM -0500, Eddie James wrote: > > On 7/11/20 8:48 AM, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > > IBM created an implementation of the PCA9552 on a PIC16F > > > microcontroller. Document the new compatible string for this device. > > Is the implementation opensource? > > > Hi, no it is not. > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eaja...@linux.ibm.com> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-pca955x.txt > > > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ Required properties: > > > "nxp,pca9550" > > > "nxp,pca9551" > > > "nxp,pca9552" > > > + "nxp,pca9552-ibm" > > > "nxp,pca9553" > > Is it good idea to use nxp prefix for something that is > > software-defined and not built by nxp? > > > Yea I suppose not... > > > > > Would ibm,pca9552 be better, or maybe even sw,pca9552 to indicate that > > is not real hardware, but software emulation? > > > How about ibm,pca9552-sw? Someone suggested that just adding "sw" could be a > problem if another company does the same thing but it isn't compatible.
ibm,pca9552 is good. Rob
