To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sam@ravnborg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] [1/9] Core module symbol namespaces code and intro.
References: <20071122343.446909000@suse.de>
	<200711221456.22297.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
	<200711221246.23994.ak@suse.de>
	<200711231129.25982.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:29:39 -0800
In-Reply-To: <200711231129.25982.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (Rusty Russell's message of "Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:29:25 +1100")
Message-ID: <adaprxyrrv0.fsf@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) XEmacs/21.4.20 (linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 678
Lines: 15

 > Yes, and if a symbol is already used by multiple modules, it's generically 
 > useful.  And if so, why restrict it to in-tree modules?

I agree that we shouldn't make things too hard for out-of-tree
modules, but I disagree with your first statement: there clearly is a
large class of symbols that are used by multiple modules but which are
not generically useful -- they are only useful by a certain small class
of modules.

 - R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/