Re: [PATCH v4 2/7] nvmem: qcom-spmi-sdam: Migrate to devm_spmi_subdevice_alloc_and_add()

Il 16/09/25 18:20, Andy Shevchenko ha scritto:

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 6:11 PM Uwe Kleine-König
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 04:35:35PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 03:24:56PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 10:44:40AM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:

...

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+MODULE_IMPORT_NS("SPMI");

If it's exactly the files that #include <linux/spmi.h> should have that
namespace import, you can put the MODULE_IMPORT_NS into that header.

Which makes anyone to import namespace even if they just want to use some types
out of the header.

Notice that I carefully formulated my suggestion to cope for this case.

And I carefully answered. Your proposal won't prevent _other_ files to
use the same header in the future without needing a namespace to be
imported.

quoted

quoted

This is not good solution generally speaking. Also this will
diminish one of the purposes of _NS variants of MODULE*/EXPORT*, i.e. make it
invisible that some of the code may become an abuser of the API just by someone
include the header (for a reason or by a mistake).

Yeah, opinions differ. In my eyes it's quite elegant.

It's not a pure opinion, it has a technical background that I
explained. The explicit usage of MODULE_IMPORT_NS() is better than
some header somewhere that might even be included by another and be
proxied to the code that doesn't need / want to have this namespace to
be present. Puting MODULE_IMPORT_NS() into a _header_ is a minefield
for the future.

Uwe, thanks for your review - much appreciated.

Even though I get your point... Sorry, but here I do agree with Andy, and I think
he explained some of the reasons pretty well.

Cheers,
Angelo



-- 
linux-phy mailing list
linux-phy@lists.infradead.org
https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy