From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:47674 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753321Ab0ISCnG (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Sep 2010 22:43:06 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: export ppc_tb_freq so that modules can reference it From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Kumar Gala Cc: Tabi Timur-B04825 , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <70810686-1EB6-4AD9-A89B-C2A8BA6AC30D@freescale.com> References: <1284764008-19469-1-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> <1284779678.30449.108.camel@pasglop> <70810686-1EB6-4AD9-A89B-C2A8BA6AC30D@freescale.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 12:42:53 +1000 Message-ID: <1284864173.30449.111.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-watchdog-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2010-09-18 at 10:34 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > On Sep 18, 2010, at 9:36 AM, Tabi Timur-B04825 wrote: > > > On Sep 17, 2010, at 10:14 PM, "Benjamin Herrenschmidt" wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 20:20 -0500, Timur Tabi wrote: > >>> I don't see any reason to limit it to GPL drivers. Not only that, but > >>> then we'll have this: > >> > >> I do > > > > Can you elaborate on that, or are you just going to pull rank on me? > > > >> > >>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(ppc_proc_freq); > >>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ppc_tb_freq); > >>> > >>> That just looks dumb. > >> > >> Right, so send a patch to fix the first one too :-) > > I don't think either of these should be EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL. Why > shouldn't a binary module be allowed to know these frequencies? My > view is why preclude anyone from using this how they want. If they > want to live in the gray area so be it. Who am I to say they > shouldn't have that choice. Well, I'm all for making binary modules life as hard as possible just for the sake of it :-) Cheers, Ben.