lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Nov]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mfd: cpcap: Add minimal support
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:59 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Nov 2016, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>
>> * Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> [161121 03:43]:
>> > On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> > > --- a/drivers/mfd/Makefile
>> > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/Makefile
>> > > @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_MC13XXX_I2C) += mc13xxx-i2c.o
>> > > obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_CORE) += mfd-core.o
>> > >
>> > > obj-$(CONFIG_EZX_PCAP) += ezx-pcap.o
>> > > +obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_CPCAP) += cpcap.o
>> >
>> > Who is the manufacturer?
>>
>> Hmm that I don't know. There seems to be both ST and TI versions
>> of this chip manufactured for Motorola. So my guess is that it
>> should be Motorola unless there's some similar catalog part
>> available from ST used by others. If anybody has more info
>> on this please let me know :)
>
> If this IP is shared amongst vendors, it usually means it was designed
> by someone else? Synopsis perhaps?

xCAP names originated from Motorola cellular group with parts (going
back to analog/2G days) coming from Motorola Semi, TI, and ST it
seems. All individually developed AFAIK.

Rob

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-11-29 16:21    [W:0.064 / U:0.692 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site