From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:52601 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1031064AbXDQSqy (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Apr 2007 14:46:54 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ieee80211-crypt: Make some TKIP and CCMP error logging conditional on IEEE80211_DEBUG_DROP From: Dan Williams To: "John W. Linville" Cc: Larry Finger , Michael Buesch , Andreas Schwab , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de In-Reply-To: <20070417152103.GC8633@tuxdriver.com> References: <461a68c9.Nx0/XQSxDR1PJhM4%Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> <4623C561.4030201@lwfinger.net> <200704162237.01280.mb@bu3sch.de> <462413AE.9020200@lwfinger.net> <20070417131222.GA8633@tuxdriver.com> <1176819909.26202.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070417152103.GC8633@tuxdriver.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 14:49:03 -0400 Message-Id: <1176835743.28794.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 11:21 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 10:25:08AM -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 09:12 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 07:24:14PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote: > > > > Michael Buesch wrote: > > > > > On Monday 16 April 2007 20:50, Larry Finger wrote: > > > > > > > >> @@ -229,6 +229,7 @@ void free_ieee80211(struct net_device *d > > > > >> > > > > >> static int debug = 0; > > > > >> u32 ieee80211_debug_level = 0; > > > > >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ieee80211_debug_level); > > > > > > > > > > We don't use the _GPL suffix in mac80211. > > > > > > > > Upon inspection, neither does most of ieee80211. It is now changed. > > > > > > You are strongly encouraged to use the _GPL version for new symbol > > > exports, especially those which are fundamentally internal to > > > in-kernel subsystems and/or have no reasonable usage by drivers. > > > FWIW, this symbol would seem to fulfill both of those criteria. > > > > > > If you do not object, I would prefer the _GPL version of the patch. > > > > What's the rationale for mac80211 _not_ using _GPL exports? I thought > > most new exports were pretty much required to be _GPL (otherwise > > somebody would NAK it) unless it was really, really necessary that they > > weren't. > > An argument against _GPL exports for mac80211 might be leaving the > exports alone as a token of gratitude or respect towards Devicescape > for having seeded the development of mac80211 with a big chunk of code. > While I do thank Devicescape for their support, I'm not sure that > this argument would be truly compelling. > > A more presuasive argument in favor of this pragmatism is that > it would be counter-productive to discourage driver availability. > At this point regulatory issues are still enough of a spectre that > some vendors will want the option of offering non-GPL drivers. > Such drivers would clearly not be redistributable, but there are > arguments that allow for such drivers (i.e. "the user installed > the driver -- not us", etc like Nvidia video drivers). Of course, > no one likes enabling this kind of "bad behaviour". Completely agree; my observations are based on mails from people like gregkh and christoph h (who seem to be most vocal in this area), and they alone are certainly not representative of kernel policy. I've seen more than a few things NAK-ed by various people due to symbol exports, or at least serious questions raised about _why_ they are non-GPL. So we'd better at least be able to come up with reasons why one was chosen over the other. I don't particularly care one way or the other. I guess the only way we find out is if somebody speaks up when a merge happens :) Dan > Probably the best reason in favor of leaving them as-is is that they > were written that way by their original author(s). > > Should I ask for opinionated discussion on the matter? :-) > > John