Hi!

> IBM created an implementation of the PCA9552 on a PIC16F
> microcontroller. Document the new compatible string for this device.

Is the implementation opensource?

> Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com>

> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-pca955x.txt
> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ Required properties:
>  	"nxp,pca9550"
>  	"nxp,pca9551"
>  	"nxp,pca9552"
> +	"nxp,pca9552-ibm"
>  	"nxp,pca9553"

Is it good idea to use nxp prefix for something that is
software-defined and not built by nxp?

Would ibm,pca9552 be better, or maybe even sw,pca9552 to indicate that
is not real hardware, but software emulation?

Best regards,
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html