[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dcff3895-53c6-496c-8574-96943d1eddc5@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2026 17:02:46 +0200
From: Erikas Bitovtas <xerikasxx@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Jonathan Cameron
<jic23@...nel.org>, David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Kevin Tsai <ktsai@...ellamicro.com>
Cc: linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht,
phone-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: Add binding document for cm36686
> Compatible says cm36672p... Confusing.
> Why higher number is the fallback? Explain this in the commit msg.
This driver was initially written for cm36686, which is an ambient light and
proximity sensor. But cm36672p shares the same register and regfield layout, it
is just missing an ambient light channel, because it is a proximity-only sensor
and has no ambient light registers.
In v1 the compatible looked like this:
compatible:
enum:
- capella,cm36686
- capella,cm36672p
Powered by blists - more mailing lists