Need more symbols to be exported out of kernel

Need more symbols to be exported out of kernel

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

   I have implemented file_operations->write() function for reiserfs for
   linux kernel v2.4, and it seems I need these symbols to be exported
   out of kernel for a case when reiserfs is built as a module:
   generic_osync_inode
   remove_suid
   block_commit_write

   I need block_commit_write just because generic_commit_write is doing
   some extra stuff I'd better do myself.
   Will the patch to export these symbols be accepted? (should these be
   exported as GPL sysmbols or not?).

   You can look a my current code on top of 2.4.20-pre2+ at
   ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiserfs-for-2.4/2.4.19.pending/testing

Bye,
    Oleg

Re: Need more symbols to be exported out of kernel

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 06:42:08PM +0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> Hello!
> 
>    I have implemented file_operations->write() function for reiserfs for
>    linux kernel v2.4, and it seems I need these symbols to be exported
>    out of kernel for a case when reiserfs is built as a module:
>    generic_osync_inode

sounds like a good idea.

>    remove_suid

trivial inline,  either move it to a header or copy & paste.

>    block_commit_write

fine with me.

>    I need block_commit_write just because generic_commit_write is doing
>    some extra stuff I'd better do myself.
>    Will the patch to export these symbols be accepted? (should these be
>    exported as GPL sysmbols or not?).

IMHO no _GPL, they are not different from other generic filesystem code.

Re: Need more symbols to be exported out of kernel

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 03:52:26PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> >    remove_suid
> trivial inline,  either move it to a header or copy & paste.

Moving to header file trned out to be not that trivial ;)
So I just exported it as it is, since it never was inline desplite
the definition.
Ans I hate duplicating code as it will become maintenance nightmare
later.

Ok, here is first draft of the patch, any issues?

# This is a BitKeeper generated patch for the following project:
# Project Name: Linux kernel tree
# This patch format is intended for GNU patch command version 2.5 or higher.
# This patch includes the following deltas:
#	           ChangeSet	1.748   -> 1.749  
#	      kernel/ksyms.c	1.60    -> 1.61   
#	        mm/filemap.c	1.67    -> 1.68   
#
# The following is the BitKeeper ChangeSet Log
# --------------------------------------------
# 02/08/19	green@angband.namesys.com	1.749
# export generic_osync_inode,block_commit_write, remove_suid
# --------------------------------------------
#
diff -Nru a/kernel/ksyms.c b/kernel/ksyms.c
--- a/kernel/ksyms.c	Mon Aug 19 19:24:31 2002
+++ b/kernel/ksyms.c	Mon Aug 19 19:24:31 2002
@@ -215,6 +215,7 @@
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(generic_cont_expand);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(cont_prepare_write);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(generic_commit_write);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(block_commit_write);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(block_truncate_page);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(generic_block_bmap);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(generic_file_read);
@@ -531,6 +532,8 @@
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(is_bad_inode);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(event);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(brw_page);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(generic_osync_inode);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(remove_suid);
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_UID16
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(overflowuid);
diff -Nru a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
--- a/mm/filemap.c	Mon Aug 19 19:24:31 2002
+++ b/mm/filemap.c	Mon Aug 19 19:24:31 2002
@@ -2886,7 +2886,7 @@
 	return page;
 }
 
-inline void remove_suid(struct inode *inode)
+void remove_suid(struct inode *inode)
 {
 	unsigned int mode;
 

Bye,
    Oleg