Re: [PATCH v8 01/17] spi: add basic support for SPI offloading

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@smile.fi.intel.com/ (local)).
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.