Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:27:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:27:04 -0500 Received: from brooklyn-bridge.emea.veritas.com ([62.172.234.2]:53034 "EHLO einstein.homenet") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:26:50 -0500 Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 12:30:14 +0000 (GMT) From: Tigran Aivazian X-X-Sender: To: Alan Cox cc: Gerd Knorr , Marcelo Tosatti , Kernel List , Subject: Re: [patch] vmalloc_to_page() backport for 2.4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Greetings Alan, On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Alan Cox wrote: > > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Gerd Knorr wrote: > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vmalloc_to_page); > > > > Can you (or whoever made it EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL in 2.5) please explain what > > is so "GPL" about exporting this symbol, please? I can understand when > > symbols related to the internals of some subsystem are GPL-only-exported > > but this does not appear to be such a case. > > Its an internal helper function shared by some GPL drivers, its not something > you need to register a non free driver. As such its simply in the kernel > core rather than duplicated for the convenience of free driver authors. Thank you for answering my query, but one may disagree that it is an internal helper function because it can conceivably be used by modules to help them be independent of PAE/non-PAE kernel configuration. And, as such, it suggests that the _GPL bit in the export clause is not justified and should be removed. There is no reason whatsoever why Linux base kernel should allow some useful functionality to GPL modules and disallow the same to non-GPL ones. In other words, your statement is absolutely correct when applied to other EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL symbols but, imho, is incorrect when applied to this particular one. I cc'd Arjan because, perhaps, he has some other technical reasons why it is _GPL'd, in which case my query would be covered completely. (Obviously, being unfriendly to non-GPL modules is not a valid technical reason :) (note, that despite me writing this email as @veritas.com we don't actually need this symbol to be _GPL but if I believe something is not right I feel it is my duty to say so -- maybe it helps someone else in the future, if not directly ourselves now) Regards, Tigran - 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/