Re: [PATCH v4] module: Rename EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL_FOR_MODULES to EXPORT_SYMBOL_FOR_MODULES

Daniel Gomez
2025-08-15T15:40:05Z

On 15/08/2025 07.25, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 09:54:43AM +0200, Daniel Gomez wrote:
>> On 11/08/2025 07.18, Christian Brauner wrote:j
>>> On Fri, 08 Aug 2025 15:28:47 +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>>> Christoph suggested that the explicit _GPL_ can be dropped from the
>>>> module namespace export macro, as it's intended for in-tree modules
>>>> only. It would be possible to restrict it technically, but it was
>>>> pointed out [2] that some cases of using an out-of-tree build of an
>>>> in-tree module with the same name are legitimate. But in that case those
>>>> also have to be GPL anyway so it's unnecessary to spell it out in the
>>>> macro name.
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Ok, so last I remember we said that this is going upstream rather sooner
>>> than later before we keep piling on users. If that's still the case I'll
>>> take it via vfs.fixes unless I hear objections.
>>
>> This used to go through Masahiro's kbuild tree. However, since he is not
>> available anymore [1] I think it makes sense that this goes through the modules
>> tree. The only reason we waited until rc1 was released was because of Greg's
>> advise [2]. Let me know if that makes sense to you and if so, I'll merge this
>> ASAP.
>
> At this point it would mean messing up all of vfs.fixes to drop it from
> there. So I'd just leave it in there and send it to Linus.

Got it. I was waiting for confirmation before taking it into the modules tree,
and I agree that at this point it makes sense to keep it in vfs.fixes.

> Next time I know where it'll end up.

Can you clarify what you mean by this?