Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-157070-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 17:26:46 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
	Jan Dabros <jsd@semihalf.com>, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>,
	Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>, Jiawen Wu <jiawenwu@trustnetic.com>,
	Mengyuan Lou <mengyuanlou@net-swift.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Duanqiang Wen <duanqiangwen@net-swift.com>,
	"open list:SYNOPSYS DESIGNWARE I2C DRIVER" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:WANGXUN ETHERNET DRIVER" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Define i2c_designware in a header file
Message-ID: <ZikWps1DIVPNJeOp@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20240423233622.1494708-1-florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>
 <ZihKtSble151A5mT@surfacebook.localdomain>
 <e55c35c2-1bff-4b12-aa3b-713c6085d303@broadcom.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e55c35c2-1bff-4b12-aa3b-713c6085d303@broadcom.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo

On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 06:21:21PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 4/23/2024 4:56 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 04:36:18PM -0700, Florian Fainelli kirjoitti:
> > > This patch series depends upon the following two patches being applied:
> > > 
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240422084109.3201-1-duanqiangwen@net-swift.com/
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240422084109.3201-2-duanqiangwen@net-swift.com/
> > > 
> > > There is no reason why each driver should have to repeat the
> > > "i2c_designware" string all over the place, because when that happens we
> > > see the reverts like the above being necessary.
> > 
> > Isn't that a part of ABI between drivers, i.e. whenever ones want to
> > request_module() or so they need to know what they are doing, no?
> 
> Yes, the drivers should know, but as evidenced by the two patches above,
> there was still room for error. If we have to abide by a certain contract,
> which is platform_driver::driver::name, then we might as well have a header
> defining it no?

Maybe, I simply don't like the manipulations with parts of the device instance
names / driver IDs / driver name, which all become mixed after this series.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko