On Fri, Dec 27, 2024 at 03:30:20PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Wed, Dec 25, 2024 at 04:20:46PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > > > For the platform that not compatible with scmi pinctrl device, the > > fwnode will not be set, so checking fwnode will make code simpler > > and easy to maintain. > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c | 7 +------ > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c > > index df4bbcd7d1d59ac2c8ddc320dc10d702ad1ed5b2..aade6df77dbb2c391741e77c0aac3f029991e4bb 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c > > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c > > @@ -505,11 +505,6 @@ static int pinctrl_scmi_get_pins(struct scmi_pinctrl *pmx, > > return 0; > > } > > > > -static const char * const scmi_pinctrl_blocklist[] = { > > - "fsl,imx95", > > - NULL > > -}; > > - > > static int scmi_pinctrl_probe(struct scmi_device *sdev) > > { > > int ret; > > @@ -521,7 +516,7 @@ static int scmi_pinctrl_probe(struct scmi_device *sdev) > > if (!sdev->handle) > > return -EINVAL; > > > > - if (of_machine_compatible_match(scmi_pinctrl_blocklist)) > > + if (!dev->fwnode) > > I would prefer to see the blocklist to be explicit here rather than > implicitly hiding it away with this change set. Using a flag to inhibit device_link_add as said early in the series this could be dropped and kept as is, I suppose. Thanks, Cristian