Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 26 Sep 2022 13:10:10 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= 
        <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] pwm: lpss: Move exported symbols to PWM_LPSS
 namespace
Message-ID: <YzF6ggfpyZSMfkIN@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20220908135658.64463-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <20220908135658.64463-3-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <20220924095945.pzyhc24jhjwlfdin@pengutronix.de>
 <YzF0U7q5Fl0UaogR@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <20220926095547.be5bbtyqqlm4ytgy@pengutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20220926095547.be5bbtyqqlm4ytgy@pengutronix.de>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 11:55:47AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 12:43:47PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 11:59:45AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 08, 2022 at 04:56:51PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

...

> > > > +MODULE_IMPORT_NS(PWM_LPSS);
> > > 
> > > Each user of the lpss.h header needs that, right? Then the
> > > MODULE_IMPORT_NS statement can go into the header, too.
> > 
> > With the same answer as for v1: any user that might include the header for
> > the sake of data types will get the NS inclusion even if they don't need
> > that (yes, I don't think it's practical, but slightly better to make sure
> 
> I'm not sure I understand you correctly here. For some headers you
> cannot assume that a file including the header also needs the namespace
> macro, but for pwm-lpss.h that should be a safe assumption.

Yes, it's a safe assumption for _this_ case (as I pointed out above that
there is probably no practical to assume otherwise), in general it may be
not the case.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko