On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 06:23:11PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 20/11/2024 18:18, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 03:36:56PM -0500, Mikael Gonella-Bolduc via B4 Relay wrote: > >> From: Mikael Gonella-Bolduc <mgonellabolduc@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Add device tree bindings for APDS9160 driver > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Mikael Gonella-Bolduc <mgonellabolduc@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> .../bindings/iio/light/avago,apds9160.yaml | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/light/avago,apds9160.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/light/avago,apds9160.yaml > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..12e196b297fe523e4d324156041ef9c6900676eb > >> --- /dev/null > >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/light/avago,apds9160.yaml > >> @@ -0,0 +1,50 @@ > >> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) > >> +%YAML 1.2 > >> +--- > >> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/iio/light/avago,apds9160.yaml# > >> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > >> + > >> +title: Broadcom Combined Proximity & Ambient light sensor > >> + > >> +maintainers: > >> + - Mikael Gonella-Bolduc <m.gonella.bolduc@xxxxxxxxx> > >> + > >> +description: | > >> + Datasheet: https://docs.broadcom.com/docs/APDS-9160-003-DS > >> + > >> +properties: > >> + compatible: > >> + enum: > >> + - avago,apds9160 > >> + - broadmobi,apds9160 > > > > What is the difference between these two devices? There's no match data, > > makes it seem like there should be a fallback going on here. > Same device names suggest this is some legacy. We don't take new > bindings for legacy stuff. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Hi, Thank you for the feedback. There's no difference between these two devices, it's the same chip using two different names. There's two names because the chip was first released before the Avago & Broadcom acquisition. The datasheet available has the avago name in it and it's referenced using both names. I did not know which name to include so I wrote both. It's old but still being produced today and active for new designs. Is it too old for the driver to be mainlined? If not, which name should I use? Best regards, Mikael
