From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from TX2EHSOBE004.bigfish.com (tx2ehsobe002.messaging.microsoft.com [65.55.88.12]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38316B70AB for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 04:51:58 +1000 (EST) Received: from mail54-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail54-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3F931203EE for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 18:51:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TX2EHSMHS031.bigfish.com (unknown [10.9.14.241]) by mail54-tx2.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B530191805F for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 18:51:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from de01smr02.am.mot.com (de01smr02.freescale.net [10.208.0.151]) by az33egw01.freescale.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o8KIpdsO008039 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 11:51:39 -0700 (MST) Received: from az33exm25.fsl.freescale.net (az33exm25.am.freescale.net [10.64.32.16]) by de01smr02.am.mot.com (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id o8KJ724k000977 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:07:02 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 13:51:36 -0500 From: Scott Wood To: Josh Boyer Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: export ppc_tb_freq so that modules can reference it Message-ID: <20100920135136.04ceb772@udp111988uds.am.freescale.net> In-Reply-To: References: <1284764008-19469-1-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> <1284779678.30449.108.camel@pasglop> <70810686-1EB6-4AD9-A89B-C2A8BA6AC30D@freescale.com> <5610599F537DD74A8D1F5CC946A75073034792F7@az33exm25.fsl.freescale.net> <5610599F537DD74A8D1F5CC946A75073034792F9@az33exm25.fsl.freescale.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Gala Kumar-B11780 , Tabi Timur-B04825 , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 14:22:12 -0400 Josh Boyer wrote: > Capitalizing? The patch you posted that uses this symbol is for a GPL > driver so you gain or lose nothing by having this symbol be > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL. Are you somehow advocating and getting some sort > of gain by allowing non-GPL modules? If so, I find that unfortunate. > If not, then I guess I don't understand what you mean by capitalizing. One can dislike DRM (even a very weak form such as this) without having a particular desire to go outside the bounds of what it allows. I thought EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL was originally meant to indicate the symbols whose use is likely to be indicitave of code that is, in some copyright-meaningful way, derived from GPL code? I have a hard time seeing that being the case here. If every symbol is made GPL-only, then that just gives the binary-only people[1] more incentive to circumvent the entire mechanism. It loses its meaning. Documentation/DocBook/kernel-hacking.tmpl says, "It implies that the function is considered an internal implementation issue, and not really an interface." -Scott [1] Plus anyone who might want to make a kernel module out of code which is open source, but not under a license the GPLv2 is compatible with.