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
<m.szyprow...@samsung.com> 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
