Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 Feb 2023 19:53:10 +0000 | From | Conor Dooley <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 13/20] reset: remove MODULE_LICENSE in non-modules |
| |
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 07:26:55PM +0000, Nick Alcock wrote: > [dropped non-lists to defend innocent ears from my flaming pedantry] > > On 28 Feb 2023, Conor Dooley stated: > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 01:02:08PM +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 <nick.alcock@oracle.com> > >> Suggested-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org> > >> Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org> > >> Cc: linux-modules@vger.kernel.org > >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > >> Cc: Hitomi Hasegawa <hasegawa-hitomi@fujitsu.com> > >> Cc: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> > >> Cc: Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@microchip.com> > >> Cc: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> > >> Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > >> --- > >> drivers/reset/reset-mpfs.c | 1 - > > > > I assume your script just got confused here w/ $subject, since there's > > only a change for this specific file. > > This file has had no commits since you wrote it last year, and the > subject for that commit was > > reset: add polarfire soc reset support > > so, er, yes, the script used 'reset:' as a prefix, mimicking the > existing commit. I'm not sure what else it could have done.
Oh ye, silly me - I didn't think of that. I guess that's a common pattern for commits adding a driver, as the "mpfs:" doesn't really make sense until the driver is in-tree. I'm not too sure what you could have done either, but I'm not complaining, or requesting that something be changed here.
> (Regarding the rest of the subject line, I suppose I could have arranged > to detect single-file commits and turned the subject into 'in this > non-module'? But there comes a time when even I think that maybe I might > be overdesigning something, and automated grammatical adjustments to the > subject line was that point!)
Yeah, I think it's not worth doing anything about really... [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |