Hello Linus, On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 09:12:36PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 06:16:14PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > Each user of the exported symbols related to the pwm-lpss driver needs > > to import the matching namespace. So this can just be done in the header > > together with the prototypes. > > > > This fixes drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-intel.c which failed to import > > that namespace before. (However this didn't hurt because the pwm-lpss > > module namespace isn't used; see the next commit.) > > I disagree on this change, I think it had been discussed already. > > The header must not provide any module importing features as it effectively > diminishes the point of namespace. Any (ab)user can include just a header and > be okay with that. Andy and I disagree about this change. If you happen to not have the patch in your inbox, see https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pwm/3a99048a52aeee356d01dbf7f2f06e6e0826ed78.1733245406.git.ukleinek@xxxxxxxxxx/ . Would you please volunteer as the impartial judge here as you're the upstream maintainer of drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-intel.c? The TL;DR; is: Do you prefer a single MODULE_IMPORT_NS() in a header, or should every consumer driver explicitly have its own MODULE_IMPORT_NS() invokation? I won't repeat the arguments because I think I cannot present them without making my opinion too obvious, so please see the discussion between Andy and me in the above linked thread. Best regards and thanks, Uwe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
