From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx.manguebit.com (mx.manguebit.com [167.235.159.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59AB413CA97 for ; Sat, 31 May 2025 18:50:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=167.235.159.17 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1748717414; cv=none; b=cfrOf5+wK1LSG7TYibfqjw9UWM+TAtxmIgB4inkJaBrUzODi04R+IkmJzO8i6S+ONRYOvPYC4WvSW8U0ma/Kcyp25DoRBhXddJG8qoHvEyN0QnvSXpYvS4f8smU+UCFfJZdELMDMYA4XfGrlyVCb1bWILVdthxEGzNPGUYUQ+LE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1748717414; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LNNz6RQq+yJSJyrqGHYeHd4lIwOVcSdsshPAJPmP/2A=; h=Message-ID:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=awWGTU29trYd3I4SDB6LEz5Dc1HwErDJE0Zka2Yx27SK1bO11kU4wDO7J/+1UJqnpBZj78p9+ZxvD8/sknwqLCCMTsvjI3Qpl4sIqs8QEG28KrJpj1LLXeZo34UrBlbhQmv/0vVTnHJo04A5yUFss24DxGUPpRb8UVvaylpKnjg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manguebit.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manguebit.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manguebit.com header.i=@manguebit.com header.b=fDDgCRmB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=167.235.159.17 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manguebit.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manguebit.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manguebit.com header.i=@manguebit.com header.b="fDDgCRmB" Message-ID: <088096eba2d038bce2f73e6519d11ce9@manguebit.com> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manguebit.com; s=dkim; t=1748717403; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=L5XNyCacvsECkV8OPMUggCJaFwEvY2kqdPe+35lKuQU=; b=fDDgCRmBbLHoXvm71nJlo4XwDgfEqx24dCvXV3o5NRZrQssKtIGT+jKpbSx6eHwg5Ulvbh k5PYQ7mc0jYNnSkNQMOUUs58BYSFj5MXt8QVLSntvEc9UkK7wF2aePYMW6cuHrQoFeD5T1 RPuunO5JUzhW3GMbuhcnEevDspQ1nWyl3RqeBJC6M1goeWNZcaB4pPZGjG+N7XNmUqGkZ9 0YXa0ae44MselLcaSIXPhByLea7yotCp+cUVUMIJ/JhZIbpnKAkG6W3uLxnFAd3lHJ+bx0 npxpT8LNNYxs9v1cjK2UhMsN+J7E1Fg4ofRTvAx4guL48wfz7vuEQuQJWCRGXg== From: Paulo Alcantara To: Steve French , Linus Walleij Cc: Namjae Jeon , Sergey Senozhatsky , Tom Talpey , linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Rosen Penev Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: ksmbd: provide MODULE_VERSION() In-Reply-To: References: <20250531-ksmbd-sysfs-module-v1-1-248cf10fa87d@linaro.org> Date: Sat, 31 May 2025 15:49:47 -0300 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Steve French writes: > It is interesting that almost 700 kernel modules define > MODULE_VERSION() for their module, but only 4 filesystems (including > cifs.ko). I find it useful mainly for seeing which fixes are in > (since some distros do 'full backports' so easier to look at the > module version sometimes to see what fixes are likely in the module > when someone reports a problem). I am curious why few fs use it > though since it is apparently very widely used for other module types. I find cifs.ko version quite useless, especially for distro and stable kernels which take fixes from newer versions while not backporting the commit that bumps cifs.ko version. So relying on that version becomes pointless, IMO.