On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 12:11 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: I do not think you need this helper (at least in your purpose). You will use this helper in the 4/7 patch. Then, you will immediately revert it in the 5/7 patch. If you look at the final result, you did not need to add mod_basename() in the first place. (There is just one call site, which does not save any duplicated code). I suggest adding verify_module_namespace() in the 4/7 patch instead of using the helper. BTW, I think this helper is useful for cleaning up the current code, but you are not even aware that this common pattern appears multiple times. https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250207175024.412054-1-masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#u > > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > scripts/mod/modpost.c | 16 +++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > --- a/scripts/mod/modpost.c > +++ b/scripts/mod/modpost.c > @@ -1553,6 +1553,16 @@ static void mod_set_crcs(struct module * > free(buf); > } > > +static const char *mod_basename(const char *modname) > +{ > + const char *basename = strrchr(modname, '/'); > + if (basename) > + basename++; > + else > + basename = modname; > + return basename; > +} > + > static void read_symbols(const char *modname) > { > const char *symname; > @@ -1697,11 +1707,7 @@ static void check_exports(struct module > s->crc_valid = exp->crc_valid; > s->crc = exp->crc; > > - basename = strrchr(mod->name, '/'); > - if (basename) > - basename++; > - else > - basename = mod->name; > + basename = mod_basename(mod->name); > > if (!contains_namespace(&mod->imported_namespaces, exp->namespace)) { > modpost_log(!allow_missing_ns_imports, > > -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
