[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210810143406.GC4704@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 15:34:06 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
"UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com" <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: mscc: Fix non-GPL export of regmap APIs
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 12:55:37PM +0000, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 01:37:48PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The ocelot driver makes use of regmap, wrapping it with driver specific
> > operations that are thin wrappers around the core regmap APIs. These are
> > exported with EXPORT_SYMBOL, dropping the _GPL from the core regmap
> > exports which is frowned upon. Add _GPL suffixes to at least the APIs that
> > are doing register I/O.
> Stupid question: is this enough? We also have order-two symbols exported
> as non-GPL, which call one of {__ocelot_read_ix, __ocelot_write_ix,
> __ocelot_rmw_ix, ocelot_port_writel, ocelot_port_rmwl, ocelot_regfields_init,
> ocelot_regmap_init}, and therefore indirectly call regmap. In fact, I
> think that all symbols exported by ocelot do that.
Yes, that'd be much better I think - I have to confess I didn't look at
the driver in too much detail beyond these most obvious examples to
figure out how exactly they slotted in structurally.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists