Hi Marek, first, thanks a *lot* for testing this, it is is much, much appreciated!
On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 3:35 PM Marek Szyprowski <[email protected]> wrote: > The idea is good imho, but it looks that there are some missing cases in > the code. Here are some logs from the boards I have access to: OK let's fix this! > Artik5 evaluation board (arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250-artik5-eval.dtb): > s2mps11-pmic s2mps14-regulator: Failed to get control GPIO for 11/LDO12 Question: this is supposed to fail, right? It is something like a probe deferral or nonexisting GPIO controller? I look in the upstream tree: arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250-artik5.dtsi where s2mps14 is defined: ldo12_reg: LDO12 { /* VDD72 ~ VDD73 */ regulator-name = "VLDO12_2.8V"; regulator-min-microvolt = <2800000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <2800000>; samsung,ext-control-gpios = <&gpk0 2 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; }; I didn't really change anything about this, so this missing GPIO descriptor looks worrysome. Anyways what happens is this: gpio[reg] = devm_gpiod_get_from_of_node(...) if (IS_ERR(gpio[reg])) (...) continue; So this IS_ERR descriptor is left around. So we should probably handle erronoeus or NULL descriptors in gpiod_unhinge(). If you add this on top, does it start working? diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-devres.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-devres.c index 5864e758d7f2..e35751bf0ea8 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-devres.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-devres.c @@ -332,6 +332,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(devm_gpiod_put); void devm_gpiod_unhinge(struct device *dev, struct gpio_desc *desc) { + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(desc)) + return; WARN_ON(devres_destroy(dev, devm_gpiod_release, devm_gpiod_match, desc)); } Yours, Linus Walleij
