Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 9 Jan 2019 12:19:52 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     Marc Dionne <marc.c.dionne@gmail.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: x86/fpu: Don't export __kernel_fpu_{begin,end}()
Message-ID: <20190109111951.5zvnj7ls6jv56p2u@linutronix.de>
References: <git-mailbomb-linux-master-12209993e98c5fa1855c467f22a24e3d5b8be205@kernel.org>
 <CAB9dFdsZb-sZixeOzrt8F50h1pnUK2W2Cxx8+xjhgd0=6xs7iw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
In-Reply-To: <CAB9dFdsZb-sZixeOzrt8F50h1pnUK2W2Cxx8+xjhgd0=6xs7iw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2019-01-07 18:08:26 [-0400], Marc Dionne wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 11:20 AM Linux Kernel Mailing List
> <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Commit:     12209993e98c5fa1855c467f22a24e3d5b8be205
> >     x86/fpu: Don't export __kernel_fpu_{begin,end}()
> >
…
> >     With EFI gone as the last user of __kernel_fpu_{begin|end}(), both can
> >     be made static and not exported anymore.
> >
> This commit removes an exported function pair that is currently used
> by out of tree modules, while the replacement pair
> (kernel_fpu_begin/end) is EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL.  So this is making
> existing functionality GPL only, which will probably be an issue for
> several out of tree modules that use the fpu.
> 
> Could kernel_fpu_begin/end be made plain EXPORT_SYMBOL?

It can be used by OOT modules as long as they are not under a
proprietary license. The change here is not for me to decide, I added
the x86 maintainers to make their decision. I can make a patch if they
say so.

On the other hand could we just drop EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I doubt this
helps in any way yet please correct me if I am wrong. 
The kernel is GPL and everything links to it should be GPL compatible. People
that don't specify a GPL compatible license either use wrapper around their
binary blob or use EXPORT_SYMBOL functions. The latter group complains each
time a function is not available anymore and we end up changing it to
EXPORT_SYMBOL.
So what do we gain from that EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL?

> Marc

Sebastian