On 3/13/26 4:46 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 03:20:42PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> Module "versions" do not make sense as the kernel is built all at once, >> the "version" is the overall kernel version number, so modules can not >> really be described as having a unique version given that they rely on >> the infrastructure of the whole kernel. >> >> For now, just make this an "empty" define, to keep existing code >> building properly as the tree is slowly purged of the use of this over >> time. >> >> This macro will be removed entirely in the future when there are no >> in-tree users. >> >> Cc: Luis Chamberlain <[email protected]> >> Cc: Petr Pavlu <[email protected]> >> Cc: Daniel Gomez <[email protected]> >> Cc: Sami Tolvanen <[email protected]> >> Cc: Aaron Tomlin <[email protected]> >> Cc: Shyam Saini <[email protected]> >> Cc: Kees Cook <[email protected]> >> Cc: Thorsten Blum <[email protected]> >> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> >> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> >> --- >> include/linux/module.h | 56 +++++++++--------------------------------- >> kernel/params.c | 30 ---------------------- >> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-) > > > Sami just pointed out to me off-list that maybe I should also drop the > srcversion stuff too. I'll gladly do that too, does anyone know if > anyone even uses that anymore?
Despite its name, I believe srcversion is primarily used to identify binaries. Nowadays, modules contain build IDs, which is a standard mechanism for this. The information is available already via /sys/module/<module>/notes/.note.gnu.build-id, so removing the srcversion data makes sense to me. -- Thanks, Petr
