The binding definition for the PCF857x GPIO expanders doesn't mention
a "ti,pcf8575" compatible string. This is apparently because TI is
only a second source - there is no functional difference between
PCF8575 chips manufactured by TI and NXP, and the same board might be
populated with either depending on availability.
This is not a problem in practice because the I2C core uses
of_modalias_node() before matching drivers and this strips the
manufacturer name.
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <[email protected]>
---
v2: Correct the claim that this is a practical problem.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-pxa-pci-ce4100.txt | 4 ++--
arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-pxa-pci-ce4100.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-pxa-pci-ce4100.txt
index 569b16248514..1ff6f8487a2d 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-pxa-pci-ce4100.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-pxa-pci-ce4100.txt
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ This is an example which is used on FalconFalls:
/* This I2C controller has one gpio controller */
gpio@26 {
#gpio-cells = <2>;
- compatible = "ti,pcf8575";
+ compatible = "nxp,pcf8575";
reg = <0x26>;
gpio-controller;
};
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ This is an example which is used on FalconFalls:
gpio@26 {
#gpio-cells = <2>;
- compatible = "ti,pcf8575";
+ compatible = "nxp,pcf8575";
reg = <0x26>;
gpio-controller;
};
diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts b/arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts
index ce874f872cc6..4958e0045c34 100644
--- a/arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts
+++ b/arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts
@@ -252,7 +252,7 @@
gpio@26 {
#gpio-cells = <2>;
- compatible = "ti,pcf8575";
+ compatible = "nxp,pcf8575";
reg = <0x26>;
gpio-controller;
};
@@ -266,7 +266,7 @@
gpio@26 {
#gpio-cells = <2>;
- compatible = "ti,pcf8575";
+ compatible = "nxp,pcf8575";
reg = <0x26>;
gpio-controller;
};
--
Ben Hutchings
Software Developer, Codethink Ltd.
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 04:51:20PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> The binding definition for the PCF857x GPIO expanders doesn't mention
> a "ti,pcf8575" compatible string. This is apparently because TI is
> only a second source - there is no functional difference between
> PCF8575 chips manufactured by TI and NXP, and the same board might be
> populated with either depending on availability.
>
> This is not a problem in practice because the I2C core uses
> of_modalias_node() before matching drivers and this strips the
> manufacturer name.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <[email protected]>
> ---
> v2: Correct the claim that this is a practical problem.
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-pxa-pci-ce4100.txt | 4 ++--
> arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts | 4 ++--
> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]>