On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 1:00 PM, H. Nikolaus Schaller <h...@goldelico.com>
wrote:
> The Pyra-Handheld originally used the tca6424 but recently we have
> replaced it by the pin and package compatible pcal6524. So let's
> add this to the bindings and the driver.
>
> And while we are at it, the pcal9555a does not have a compatible entry
> either but is already supported by the device id table.
> + { "pcal6524", 24 | PCA953X_TYPE | PCA_INT | PCA_PCAL, },
> { "pcal9555a", 16 | PCA953X_TYPE | PCA_INT | PCA_PCAL, },
So, from your description I can get that PCA_PCAL is redundant for
6524. Is it correct? What does L means in the model code?
Perhaps we need to rename PCA_PCAL to be more specific?
> + { .compatible = "nxp,pcal6524", .data = OF_953X(24, PCA_INT), },
> + { .compatible = "nxp,pcal9555a", .data = OF_953X(16, PCA_INT), },
Other way around, you missed PCA_PCAL in the second case.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
