From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/9] pci: Export find_pci_host_bridge() function. Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 12:26:32 +0200 Message-ID: <12857279.nHR7kEbqBW@wuerfel> References: <1404240214-9804-1-git-send-email-Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> <7101568.8DVJFku5jp@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: Tanmay Inamdar , Sinan Kaya , linaro-kernel , Catalin Marinas , Device Tree ML , linux-pci , Jingoo Han , Liviu Dudau , LKML , Will Deacon , Grant Likely , patches , Kukjin Kim , Suravee Suthikulanit , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Bjorn Helgaas List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 02 July 2014 13:43:41 Tanmay Inamdar wrote: > On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > I think EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() is better here. The new symbols are unlikely > > to be used by a peripheral device driver, and PCI host controllers are > > already restricted by EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL. > > > > You are right as long as the functions are not used directly. But what > if GPL functions are called indirectly. For example, 'pci_domain_nr' > implementation in Liviu's V7 series calls 'find_pci_host_bridge'. Good point. If pci_domain_nr() doesn't require access to an EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL symbol, it should not start doing that after this patch. For of_create_pci_host_bridge() however, I can't think of any reason to use a legacy EXPORT_SYMBOL. Arnd