[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <458194B8.1090309@sandeen.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:15:20 -0600
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>
To: Chris Wedgwood <cw@...f.org>
CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Martin Bligh <mbligh@...igh.org>,
"Michael K. Edwards" <medwards.linux@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GPL only modules [was Re: [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches
for 2.6.19]
Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 05:38:27PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
>> Yes, EXPORT_SYMBOL_INTERNAL would make a lot more sense.
>
> A quick grep shows that changing this now would require updating
> nearly 1900 instances, so patches to do this would be pretty large and
> disruptive (though we could support both during a transition and
> migrate them over time).
Please don't use that name, it strikes me as much more confusing than
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, even though I agree that _GPL doesn't quite convey
what it means, either.
EXPORT_SYMBOL_RESTRICTED? EXPORT_SYMBOL_DERIVED? At least something
which is not internally inconsistent would be good (how is something
which is exported "internal?")
And, as long as EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL continues to check that the module
using it has a GPL license, then it really -is- exactly descriptive of
what it's doing and probably shouldn't be changed. IIMHO.
-Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists