On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 08:59:19AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 07:47:02PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > - pinctrl_select_state(host->pinctrl, host->pins_uhs);
> > + /* Skip setting uhs pins if not supported */
> > + if (host->pins_uhs)
> > + pinctrl_select_state(host->pinctrl, host->pins_uhs);
> > } else {
> > dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(host->dev);
> > }
> > @@ -2816,9 +2835,12 @@ static int msdc_of_clock_parse(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > if (IS_ERR(host->src_clk))
> > return PTR_ERR(host->src_clk);
> >
> > - host->h_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "hclk");
> > - if (IS_ERR(host->h_clk))
> > - return PTR_ERR(host->h_clk);
> > + /* AN7581 SoC doesn't have hclk */
> > + if (!device_is_compatible(&pdev->dev, "airoha,an7581-mmc")) {
>
> Please avoid coding compatible in multiple places. Not only because
> above check is slow comparing to check on integer, but it just scales
> poorly and leads to less readable further code. Use driver data with
> model name or flags/quirks bitmask.
>
I implemented this in a more compatible way so we don't need an
additional compatible anymore. Soo this series is not needed anymore.
Should I flag these as not applicable anywhere in the patchwork systems?
--
Ansuel
