On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 9:36 AM Stephan Gerhold <stephan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The bmc150-accel-i2c.c driver has an "_accel" suffix for the
> compatibles of BMC150 and BMI055. This is necessary because BMC150
> contains both accelerometer (bosch,bmc150_accel) and magnetometer
> (bosch,bmc150_magn) and therefore "bosch,bmc150" would be ambiguous.
>
> However, the binding documentation suggests using "bosch,bmc150".
> Add the "_accel" suffix for BMC150 and BMI055 so the binding docs
> match what is expected by the driver.
>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Fixes: 496a39526fce8 ("iio: accel: bmc150-accel: Add DT bindings")
> Signed-off-by: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
I see this pattern elsewhere so by tradition:
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>
I suppose this is one of those situations where the two parts of the
component are on the same physical I2C bus, and phsycially inside
the same package, but accessed at two different I2C addresses?
These components are kind of ambiguous by nature. Technically
both devices could have the same compatible (by the label on the
package) but then we would need some other property on the node
to say which compatible is for which part of the component,
so tagging on "_function" like bmc150_accel and bmc150_magn
is one way to solve this, and I don't know anything better.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
