Re: EXPORT_NO_SYMBOLS vs. (null) ?

[R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl (Rogier Wolff)]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Rogier Wolff wrote:
> > 
> > Alan Cox wrote:
> > > > What is the difference between a module that exports no symbols and
> > > > includes EXPORT_NO_SYMBOLS reference, and such a module that lacks
> > > > EXPORT_NO_SYMBOLS?
> > > >
> > > > Alan once upbraided me for assuming they were the same :)
> > >
> > > EXPORT_NO_SYMBOLS             -       nothing exported
> > > MODULE_foo                    -       export specific symbol
> > >
> > > none of the above, export all globals but without modvers
> >                                 ^^^^^^^ and statics!!!!
> > 
> > I consider that a bug, but...
> 
> eh?  Can you give an example of this?  This should definitely -not- be
> the case.

Compile a kernel, marking "sx" and "riscom8" as modules. 

Install, modprobe sx, and voila, you'll pull in the riscom because
its "block_til_ready" static was found to satisfy the block_til_ready
from generic_serial. 

We're working on renaming the one in generic_serial to
"gs_block_til_ready", but haven't checked yet if the patch got
applied. So you may have to use a "month-old" kernel for this test.

				Roger. 

-- 
** R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2137555 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
* There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots. 
* There are also old, bald pilots. 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/