From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261574AbVGCXh2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 19:37:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261580AbVGCXh2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 19:37:28 -0400 Received: from mail.harddata.com ([216.123.194.198]:62090 "EHLO mail.harddata.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261574AbVGCXhV (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 19:37:21 -0400 Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 17:12:02 -0600 From: Michal Jaegermann To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: A "new driver model" and EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL question Message-ID: <20050703171202.A7210@mail.harddata.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org It dawned on me only now that a "new driver model" introduced in patches from GKH export symbols like that: EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(class_create); EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(class_destroy); and so on. The problem is that corresponding old symbols, which are still present in 2.6.12, were exported EXPORT_SYMBOL(class_simple_create); EXPORT_SYMBOL(class_simple_destroy); .... This creates a problem. There exist out-of-tree drivers which are using those symbols and, even if sources are available, are not licensed GPL for whatever reasons. No, I am not the author of any of those so I cannot do very much about re-licensing. As an effect a conversion to a "new driver model", even if simple, does not work. In particular I bumped into that with Myrinet card drivers. Was a decision to use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL deliberate and if yes then what considerations dictated it, other then the patch author wrote it that way, and what drivers in question are supposed to use when this change will show up in the mainline? It looks that 2.6.13 will do this. Thanks, Michal