Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] gpiolib: fix linker errors when GPIOLIB is disabled

["Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>]

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023, at 14:41, Pierluigi Passaro wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 02:29PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> If link fails, it means we still have unexpected calls to
>> > >>> gpiochip_request_own_desc() or gpiochip_free_own_desc(), and we should
>> > >>> fix the root cause instead of hiding it with a WARN().

>> > This means either I made a mistake in my search, or the problem
>> > has already been fixed. Either way, I think Andy should provide
>> > the exact build failure he observed so we know what caller caused
>> > the issue.
>> 
>> I believe it's not me, who first reported it. So, Pierluigi, can you point
>> out to the LKP message that reported the issue?
>> 
>> P.S> LKP sometimes finds a really twisted configurations to probe on.
>> 
>> 
> I've received the following messages:
> - https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301240409.tZdm0o0a-lkp@intel.com/
> - https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301240439.wYz6uU0k-lkp@intel.com/
> - https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230124075600.649bd7bb@canb.auug.org.au/
> Please let me know if you need further details.

I think these three are all regressions that are caused by the patch
in this thread, rather than the original problem that it was trying
to fix.

The one we're looking for is a randconfig bug that showed up
as a link failure when referencing gpiochip_request_own_desc
or gpiochip_free_own_desc.

      Arnd