[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191112114539.zjluqnpo3cynhssi@pengutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:45:39 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
dev.kurt@...dijck-laurijssen.be, wg@...ndegger.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de,
linux-can@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/9] can: af_can: export can_sock_destruct()
Hello Marc,
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 12:39:27PM +0100, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 11/12/19 12:37 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 12:15:52PM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(can_sock_destruct);
> >
> > If the users are only expected to be another can module, it might make
> > sense to use a namespace here?!
>
> How?
Use
EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS(can_sock_destruct, CAN)
instead of the plain EXPORT_SYMBOL, and near the declaration of
can_sock_destruct or in the source that makes use of the symbol add:
MODULE_IMPORT_NS(CAN);
See https://lwn.net/Articles/760045/ for some details.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Powered by blists - more mailing lists