Re: [PATCH] Revert "gpio: swnode: don't use the swnode's name as the key for GPIO lookup"

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 03:45:29PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 3:17 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 02:10:32PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 03:07:48PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 02:04:48PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 02:51:50PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 12:49:59PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 12:58:30PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 11:48:02AM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 12:43:16PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 11:31:56AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 11:29 AM Charles Keepax
> > > > > > > > > > > <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Do we have to wait for the fixes to hit Linus's tree before
> > > > > > > pushing them to stable? As they are still in Philipp Zabel's
> > > > > > > reset tree at the moment and I would quite like to stem the
> > > > > > > rising tide of tickets I am getting about audio breaking on
> > > > > > > peoples laptops as soon as possible.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, we need the fixes there first.
> > > > >
> > > > > Fair enough, but it is super sad that everyone has to sit around
> > > > > with broken devices until after the merge window. This is not a
> > > > > theoretical issue people are complaining about this now.
> > > >
> > > > Are people sitting around with this issue in 6.18-rc releases now?  Is
> > > > 6.18-final going to be broken in the same way?
> > >
> > > Yeah regrettably that is going to be broken too, at least until
> > > the first stable release either does the same revert or backports
> > > the same fixes.
> >
> > Great, we are "bug compatible!"  :)
> >
> > Seriously, this happens for minor things all the time, not that big of a
> > deal normally.
> >
> 
> Just my two cents: this feature interacts quite a lot with another new
> feature: shared GPIOs in GPIOLIB. I've already either queued or have
> under review ~7 other fixes. Since in stable, the code from this
> series would not interact with gpiolib-shared (because no way this
> should get backported), we'd still have a bit of a different
> environment in mainline and stable branches.
> 
> I would very much prefer to revert the patch in question than worry
> about divergences in logic.

Ok, fair enough, now reverted!

thanks,

greg k-h