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

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>]

On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 05:48:00PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 11:11:23AM -0600, David Lechner wrote:
> > On 2/10/25 10:45 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 02:08:58PM -0600, David Lechner wrote:
> 
> > >> +MODULE_IMPORT_NS("SPI_OFFLOAD");
> 
> > > This diminishes the point of the namespaces. Anybody who includes a (dangling)
> > > header gets namespace imported, which is not good. Same for other globally
> > > visible headers.
> 
> > In this case, we specifically split up the headers so that the only time you
> > would ever include this header is if you need to call functions in this
> > namespace (i.e. struct definitions are in linux/spi/offload/types.h which
> > doesn't import the namespace). So this doesn't actually seem like a problem
> > to me.
> 
> Indeed - I can't see any case where a user would need the header without
> needing the namespace.

You are looking from the other end. What I'm telling is that anyone who adds
a header, automatically gets a namespace. What's the point to have namespace
if it won't easily prevent from (ab)using it in the code. I consider putting
MODULE_IMPORT_NS() in the headers a bit weird.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko