On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 5:48 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, May 29, 2024, at 16:28, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 5:14 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Wed, May 29, 2024, at 15:41, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 12:50 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxxxx> > > It's different from the exported namespace. > > The function prefixes are needed due to C language, as we can't have > > two functions named the same. The export OTOH is what used for linking > > modules and if there is no need to have it exported globally, if, for > > example, compiling in this one. > > > > So, can we move to the exported namespace at the same time? > > Maybe you can come up with a patch then? Yes, why not. > I have no idea > which namespace to use here, seeing that there are already > six differnet namespaces in use in drivers/platform/x86/intel/ > but none of them seem to be a good fit for this one. > > Are you asking to just define another namespace here? Yes. > How would I define what the rules about using this namespace > are, and where are they documented? Currently we use a common sense, like a pattern: SUBSYSTEM_DRIVER or so. In this case INTEL_INT3472 is good enough as it's unique enough to not collide with anything else in Intel's world (okay, I hope that we learnt our mistakes in the past and won't issue same ACPI ID for different devices). -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
