[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080116131703.62d76abe@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:17:03 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Cc: caglar@...dus.org.tr, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
RT <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc7-rt2
> Playing devil's advocate here - the claim is that EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL is to
> indicate that code is getting too chummy with Linux internals.
>
> However, in *this* case, isn't it "code that is too chummy with *GCC* internals",
> and thus it isn't our place to say what can and can't be done with code that
> is derivative of the GCC compiler? ;)
Yes. It would be something to discuss with the FSF.
However I don't think it matters. If you are doing instruction profiling
you need *all* the code built with profiling to get good results. You
can't rebuild the Nvidia modules so you can't profile them.
Alan
--
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