diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-swnode.c
index 21478b45c127..0d7f3f09a0b4 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);
 }