On 9/7/22 8:05 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 07:44:05AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On the patch itself, it definitely makes sense in the context of ublk. >> My hesitation is mostly around not really wanting to export this to >> generic modular users. It's OK for core interfaces, of which ublk is >> on the way to becoming, but I really don't like the idea of random >> modules using it. But that's not really something we can manage with >> the export, it's either exported or it's not... > > Yes, I'm really worried about folks doing stupid things with it. > Thinking of the whole loop saga.. Exactly. But we don't really have any tools outside of clearly marking it as such. It's not like we have an EXPORT_MODULE_CORE_GPL() and with that requiring a driver or modular kernel feature that marks the module as MODULE_IS_CORE_GPL(). -- Jens Axboe
