From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com>
To: "Linus Walleij" <linusw@kernel.org>,
"Bartosz Golaszewski" <brgl@kernel.org>,
"Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@kernel.org>,
"Hans de Goede" <hansg@kernel.org>,
"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>,
"Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] gpio: swnode: restore the swnode-name-against-chip-label matching
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2026 09:53:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260211085313.16792-1-bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com> (raw)
Using the remote firmware node for software node lookup is the right
thing to do. The GPIO controller we want to resolve should have the
software node we scooped out of the reference attached to it. However,
there are existing users who abuse the software node API by creating
dummy swnodes whose name is set to the expected label string of the GPIO
controller whose pins they want to control and use them in their local
swnode references as GPIO properties.
This used to work when we compared the software node's name to the
chip's label. When we switched to using a real fwnode lookup, these
users broke down because the firmware nodes in question were never
attached to the controllers they were looking for.
Restore the label matching as a fallback to fix the broken users but add
a big FIXME urging for a better solution.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v6.18, v6.19
Fixes: 216c12047571 ("gpio: swnode: allow referencing GPIO chips by firmware nodes")
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aYkdKfP5fg6iywgr@jekhomev/
Acked-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- check if gdev_node and gdev_node->name are not NULL before trying to
match the label (Hans & Dan)
- use the right link
- collect tags
drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c
index 21478b45c127d..0d7f3f09a0b4b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c
@@ -42,6 +42,25 @@ static struct gpio_device *swnode_get_gpio_device(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
fwnode_lookup:
gdev = gpio_device_find_by_fwnode(fwnode);
+ if (!gdev && gdev_node && gdev_node->name)
+ /*
+ * FIXME: We shouldn't need to compare the GPIO controller's
+ * label against the software node that is supposedly attached
+ * to it. However there are currently GPIO users that - knowing
+ * the expected label of the GPIO chip whose pins they want to
+ * control - set up dummy software nodes named after those GPIO
+ * controllers, which aren't actually attached to them. In this
+ * case gpio_device_find_by_fwnode() will fail as no device on
+ * the GPIO bus is actually associated with the fwnode we're
+ * looking for.
+ *
+ * As a fallback: continue checking the label if we have no
+ * match. However, the situation described above is an abuse
+ * of the software node API and should be phased out and the
+ * following line - eventually removed.
+ */
+ gdev = gpio_device_find_by_label(gdev_node->name);
+
return gdev ?: ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER);
}
--
2.47.3
next reply other threads:[~2026-02-11 8:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-11 8:53 Bartosz Golaszewski [this message]
2026-02-11 11:57 ` Hans de Goede
2026-02-18 0:31 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2026-02-18 8:42 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-02-18 17:15 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2026-02-18 18:08 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-02-18 19:22 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2026-02-19 6:53 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-02-18 8:43 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260211085313.16792-1-bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com \
--to=bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arnd@kernel.org \
--cc=brgl@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hansg@kernel.org \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linusw@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®