[PATCH v4 2/7] nvmem: qcom-spmi-sdam: Migrate to devm_spmi_subdevice_alloc_and_add()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 6:11 PM Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig at baylibre.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 04:35:35PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 03:24:56PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 10:44:40AM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:

...

> > > > +MODULE_IMPORT_NS("SPMI");
> > >
> > > If it's exactly the files that #include <linux/spmi.h> should have that
> > > namespace import, you can put the MODULE_IMPORT_NS into that header.
> >
> > Which makes anyone to import namespace even if they just want to use some types
> > out of the header.
>
> Notice that I carefully formulated my suggestion to cope for this case.

And I carefully answered. Your proposal won't prevent _other_ files to
use the same header in the future without needing a namespace to be
imported.

> > This is not good solution generally speaking. Also this will
> > diminish one of the purposes of _NS variants of MODULE*/EXPORT*, i.e. make it
> > invisible that some of the code may become an abuser of the API just by someone
> > include the header (for a reason or by a mistake).
>
> Yeah, opinions differ. In my eyes it's quite elegant.

It's not a pure opinion, it has a technical background that I
explained. The explicit usage of MODULE_IMPORT_NS() is better than
some header somewhere that might even be included by another and be
proxied to the code that doesn't need / want to have this namespace to
be present. Puting MODULE_IMPORT_NS() into a _header_ is a minefield
for the future.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko