Since commit 8b41fc4454e ("kbuild: create modules.builtin without
Makefile.modbuiltin or tristate.conf"), MODULE_LICENSE declarations
are used to identify modules. As a consequence, uses of the macro
in non-modules will cause modprobe to misidentify their containing
object file as a module when it is not (false positives), and modprobe
might succeed rather than failing with a suitable error message.
So remove it in the files in this commit, none of which can be built as
modules.
Signed-off-by: Nick Alcock <[email protected]>
Suggested-by: Luis Chamberlain <[email protected]>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Hitomi Hasegawa <[email protected]>
Cc: Vladimir Oltean <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
---
lib/packing.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/packing.c b/lib/packing.c
index a96169237ae6..3f656167c17e 100644
--- a/lib/packing.c
+++ b/lib/packing.c
@@ -198,5 +198,4 @@ int packing(void *pbuf, u64 *uval, int startbit, int endbit, size_t pbuflen,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(packing);
-MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Generic bitfield packing and unpacking");
--
2.39.1.268.g9de2f9a303
On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 03:08:11PM +0000, Nick Alcock wrote:
> Since commit 8b41fc4454e ("kbuild: create modules.builtin without
> Makefile.modbuiltin or tristate.conf"), MODULE_LICENSE declarations
> are used to identify modules. As a consequence, uses of the macro
> in non-modules will cause modprobe to misidentify their containing
> object file as a module when it is not (false positives), and modprobe
> might succeed rather than failing with a suitable error message.
>
> So remove it in the files in this commit, none of which can be built as
> modules.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Alcock <[email protected]>
> Suggested-by: Luis Chamberlain <[email protected]>
> Cc: Luis Chamberlain <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: Hitomi Hasegawa <[email protected]>
> Cc: Vladimir Oltean <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> ---
> lib/packing.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/packing.c b/lib/packing.c
> index a96169237ae6..3f656167c17e 100644
> --- a/lib/packing.c
> +++ b/lib/packing.c
> @@ -198,5 +198,4 @@ int packing(void *pbuf, u64 *uval, int startbit, int endbit, size_t pbuflen,
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(packing);
>
> -MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Generic bitfield packing and unpacking");
> --
> 2.39.1.268.g9de2f9a303
>
Is this a bug fix? Does it need a Fixes: tag? How is it supposed to be
merged? lib/packing.c is maintained by netdev, and I believe that netdev
maintainers would prefer netdev patches to be submitted separately.
Note that I was copied only on this patch, I haven't read the cover
letter if that exists.
On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 17:22:14 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> Is this a bug fix? Does it need a Fixes: tag? How is it supposed to be
> merged? lib/packing.c is maintained by netdev, and I believe that netdev
> maintainers would prefer netdev patches to be submitted separately.
As Vladimir said, if you repost just patches 13 and 27 of this series
to netdev - we can take them in right away.