On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez > <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:40:08PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 02:23:41AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >>>> > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 05:33:21PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>>> > > >>>> > > I tentatively put this (and the rest of the series) on a pci/resource >>>> > > branch. I'm hoping you'll propose some clarification about >>>> > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(). >>>> > >>>> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() also serves to ensure only GPL modules can >>>> > only run that code. So for instance although we have "Dual BSD/GPL" >>>> > tags for modules pure "BSD" tags do not exist for module tags and >>>> > cannot run EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() code [0]. Also there is some folks >>>> > who do believe tha at run time all kernel modules are GPL [1] [2]. >>>> > And to be precise even though the FSF may claim a list of licenses >>>> > are GPL-compatible we cannot rely on this list alone for our own >>>> > goals and if folks want to use our EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()s they must >>>> > discuss this on lkml [2]. >>>> >>>> By "propose some clarification," I meant that I hoped you would propose a >>>> patch to Documentation/ that would give maintainers some guidance. >>> >>> I *really really* would hate to do so but only because you insist, I'll look >>> into this... >> >> OK done. > > Bjorn, > > This is now on Jonathan Corbet's tree and visible on linux-next: > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=582ed8d51e2b6cb8a168c94852bca482685c2509 Sorry, I'm just not comfortable with using EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() this way. I'm happy to use it when it has a technical justification, e.g., for internal interfaces where users of the interface are clearly derived works. But pci_iomap_wc() is not in that category, and I think it should be symmetric with similar interfaces like pci_iomap() and ioremap_wc(). I don't want to use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() for a random collection of things depending on the whim of the author. That makes for a messy environment to work in, and it's messy enough already. If we wanted to remove the EXPORT_SYMBOL/EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL distinction completely, that'd be fine with me, too. But as long as we keep it, I think it should mean something more than the preference of the author. I know I did already ack this, and I even said I would merge it, but a month of thinking about this hasn't made me more comfortable with it, so I've changed my mind. I said before that I wouldn't try to stop you if you want to merge it some other way, but I don't want to ack it, and I don't want to merge it via my tree. Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
