Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] nvmem: sprd: Add missing MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bixuan Cui <cuibixuan@huawei.com>,
        Hulk Robot <hulkci@huawei.com>
References: <20210611083348.20170-1-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
 <20210611083348.20170-2-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
 <YMMk7dr1dKyO1JyZ@kroah.com>
From:   Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <3d7d67fe-f8cf-e4dc-4839-beb64418c1f4@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 11 Jun 2021 10:09:46 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <YMMk7dr1dKyO1JyZ@kroah.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 11/06/2021 09:55, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 09:33:40AM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>> From: Bixuan Cui <cuibixuan@huawei.com>
>>
>> This patch adds missing MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE definition which generates
>> correct modalias for automatic loading of this driver when it is built
>> as an external module.
>>
>> Fixes: 096030e7f449 ("nvmem: sprd: Add Spreadtrum SoCs eFuse support")
>> Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hulkci@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Bixuan Cui <cuibixuan@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/nvmem/sprd-efuse.c | 1 +
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/sprd-efuse.c b/drivers/nvmem/sprd-efuse.c
>> index 59523245db8a..5d394559edf2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/nvmem/sprd-efuse.c
>> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/sprd-efuse.c
>> @@ -425,6 +425,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id sprd_efuse_of_match[] = {
>>   	{ .compatible = "sprd,ums312-efuse", .data = &ums312_data },
>>   	{ }
>>   };
>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sprd_efuse_of_match);
> 
> Why is this needed?  Do you have reports of this module not being
> properly auto-loaded?
> 
> I have been rejecting these types of patches from the "Hulk Robot" as
> they were just blindly going through the tree and not determining if
> this actually is a thing that needed to be fixed.

I will keep that in mind and I guess we can drop these 3 patches for now 
until someone reports the real issue.

--srini

> 
> Also, if it is a real fix, shouldn't it also go to the stable kernel
> trees?  If so, you didn't mark it as such :(
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
>