[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190107103314.GF21184@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 11:33:14 +0100
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/14] drm: move EXPORT_SYMBOL_FOR_TESTS_ONLY to
drm_util.h
On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 12:16:46AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 06:48:31PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Use EXPORT_SYMBOL_FOR_TESTS_ONLY() for functions that shall
> > + * only be visible for drmselftests.
> > + */
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_DRM_DEBUG_SELFTEST_MODULE)
> > +#define EXPORT_SYMBOL_FOR_TESTS_ONLY(x) EXPORT_SYMBOL(x)
> > +#else
> > +#define EXPORT_SYMBOL_FOR_TESTS_ONLY(x)
> > +#endif
>
> Btw, why isn't this an EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL if it is only for internal
> tests?
Yeah EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL makes sense here I think. Well most of drm is still
MIT, so it's a bit hm, but the semantics of _GPL still seem like what we.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
Powered by blists - more mailing lists