Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-47863-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <65bb648c.190a0220.d431d.4f63@mx.google.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 12:29:46 +0300
From: Andrew Kanner <andrew.kanner@gmail.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: mcgrof@kernel.org, linux-modules@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mchehab@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] module.h: define __symbol_get_gpl() as a regular
 __symbol_get()
References: <20240131190251.4668-1-andrew.kanner@gmail.com>
 <20240201052958.GA14943@lst.de>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240201052958.GA14943@lst.de>

On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 06:29:58AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 10:02:52PM +0300, Andrew Kanner wrote:
> > Prototype for __symbol_get_gpl() was introduced in the initial git
> > commit 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2"), but was not used after that.
> > 
> > In commit 9011e49d54dc ("modules: only allow symbol_get of
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL modules") Christoph Hellwig switched __symbol_get()
> > to process GPL symbols only, most likely this is what
> > __symbol_get_gpl() was designed to do.
> > 
> > We might either define __symbol_get_gpl() as __symbol_get() or remove
> > it completely as suggested by Mauro Carvalho Chehab.
> 
> Just remove it, there is no need to keep unused funtionality around.
> 
> Btw, where did the discussion start?  I hope you're not trying to
> add new symbol_get users?
> 

Of course not, no new users needed.

I haven't discussed it directly. I found the unused __symbol_get_gpl()
myself, but during investigation of wether it was ever used somewhere
found the old patch series suggested by Mauro Carvalho Chehab (in Cc).

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/5f001015990a76c0da35a4c3cf08e457ec353ab2.1652113087.git.mchehab@kernel.org/

The patch series is from 2022 and not merged. You can take [PATCH v6
1/4] which removes the unused symbol from the link.

Or I can resend v2 with my commit msg. But not sure about how it works
in such a case - will adding Suggested-by tag (if no objections from
Mauro) with the Link be ok?

-- 
Andrew Kanner