Hi Martin, On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 12:27:57PM +0200, Martin Kepplinger wrote: > ar1021_i2c simply also supports the ar1020 device we use. This is tested. > They also share the same datasheet: > > http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/40001393C.pdf > > We differentiate not only to make it obvious that we support both devices, > but also to be able to implement the few model specific things in the > future. > > Signed-off-by: Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/input/touchscreen/Kconfig | 4 ++-- > drivers/input/touchscreen/ar1021_i2c.c | 13 ++++++++++--- > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/Kconfig b/drivers/input/touchscreen/Kconfig > index 33c62e5..535b91a 100644 > --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/Kconfig > @@ -96,8 +96,8 @@ config TOUCHSCREEN_AR1021_I2C > tristate "Microchip AR1021 i2c touchscreen" > depends on I2C && OF > help > - Say Y here if you have the Microchip AR1021 touchscreen controller > - chip in your system. > + Say Y here if you have the Microchip AR1020 or AR1021 touchscreen > + controller chip in your system. > > If unsure, say N. > > diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/ar1021_i2c.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/ar1021_i2c.c > index 6562b17..1767257 100644 > --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/ar1021_i2c.c > +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/ar1021_i2c.c > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > /* > - * Microchip AR1021 driver for I2C > + * Microchip AR1020 and AR1021 driver for I2C > * > * Author: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@xxxxxxxxx> > * > @@ -24,6 +24,11 @@ struct ar1021_i2c { > u8 data[AR1021_TOCUH_PKG_SIZE]; > }; > > +enum { > + ar1021, > + ar1020, > +}; > + > static irqreturn_t ar1021_i2c_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) > { > struct ar1021_i2c *ar1021 = dev_id; > @@ -151,13 +156,15 @@ static int __maybe_unused ar1021_i2c_resume(struct device *dev) > static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(ar1021_i2c_pm, ar1021_i2c_suspend, ar1021_i2c_resume); > > static const struct i2c_device_id ar1021_i2c_id[] = { > - { "MICROCHIP_AR1021_I2C", 0 }, > + { "MICROCHIP_AR1021_I2C", ar1021 }, > + { "MICROCHIP_AR1020_I2C", ar1020 }, > { }, > }; > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, ar1021_i2c_id); > > static const struct of_device_id ar1021_i2c_of_match[] = { > { .compatible = "microchip,ar1021-i2c", }, > + { .compatible = "microchip,ar1020-i2c", }, > { } > }; > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, ar1021_i2c_of_match); > @@ -175,5 +182,5 @@ static struct i2c_driver ar1021_i2c_driver = { > module_i2c_driver(ar1021_i2c_driver); > > MODULE_AUTHOR("Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@xxxxxxxxx>"); > -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Microchip AR1021 I2C Driver"); > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Microchip AR1020 and AR1021 I2C Driver"); > MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); > -- > 2.1.4 > I do not see where you handle ar1020 differently from ar1021. If devices are compatible, you do not need to add a new compatible to the driver, simply use it in the binding: compatible = "microchip,ar1020-i2c", "microchip,ar1021-i2c"; Thanks. -- Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
