On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 07:45:30PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > There was a similar discussion some time ago about the lpss pwm driver > (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pwm/Z09YJGifvpENYNPy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/). > The arguments that you didn't accept back then already are similar to > the ones that were brought forward here. > The TL;DR; is: Adding MODULE_IMPORT_NS() to a header makes it easier for > code to use the exported symbols. Yes, that includes abusers of the > code. > But if you mostly care about the regular users of an API/ABI, making > things easy for those is the thing that matters. Agreed, if you think > that module namespaces are primarily a line of defence against abusers, > adding the import to the header weakens that defence (a bit). However a > typical header includes function prototypes and macros. Those also make > it easier for abusers. With your argumentation we better don't create > headers at all? > There are other benefits of module namespaces like reducing the set of > globally available symbols which speeds up module loading or the > ability to see in the module meta data that a namespace is used. FWIW I fully endorse what Uwe is saying here, forcing every user of the API to separately import the symbols seems more likely to create busywork than to avoid problems.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
