From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/14] locks: factor out generic/filesystem switch from setlock code Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 21:27:50 -0500 Message-ID: <20070204022750.GL7588@fieldses.org> References: <1dd47bf9aeb6f19c82a59efb2f4236f23f73019d.1170479265.git.bfields@citi.umich.edu> <20070203085136.GC18828@infradead.org> <20070203051638.GA29763@cynthia.pants.nu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, Marc Eshel To: Brad Boyer Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20070203051638.GA29763@cynthia.pants.nu> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 09:16:38PM -0800, Brad Boyer wrote: > On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 08:51:36AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 12:33:59AM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > + */ > > > +int vfs_lock_file(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, struct file_lock *fl) > > > +{ > > > + if (filp->f_op && filp->f_op->lock) > > > + return filp->f_op->lock(filp, cmd, fl); > > > + else > > > + return posix_lock_file(filp, fl); > > > +} > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(vfs_lock_file); > > > > _GPL please (and same for the last patch) > > Any particular reason? It seems like this is a function that > would be exactly the sort of thing to be publically exported. > I know it's not a popular opinion around here, but I think > that the GPL exports should be primarily for things that > aren't intended to be used by normal modules. Actually, this is only used by the NLM and NFSv4 servers. I doubt there will be other users any time soon. If you really want to argue about the EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL stuff you'll want to google through the archives for previous discussions first. --b.