Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/2] in-kernel sockets API

Daniel Phillips
2006-06-13T21:13:09Z

Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
> Stephen,
>
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>
>
>>>@@ -2176,3 +2279,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(sock_wake_async);
>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(sockfd_lookup);
>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_sendmsg);
>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_recvmsg);
>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_bind);
>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_listen);
>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_accept);
>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_connect);
>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_getsockname);
>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_getpeername);
>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_getsockopt);
>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_setsockopt);
>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_sendpage);
>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_ioctl);
>>
>>Don't we want to restrict this to GPL code with EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL?
>
>
> There are direct derivatives of the BSD/POSIX system call
> interface. The protocol function pointers within the socket
> structure are not GPL only. Why make this wrappered access to
> them GPL only? It will only encourange the reverse of what they
> were intended to do: be used instead of the protocol function
> pointers within the socket structure, that currently carry no
> such restriction.

This has the makings of a nice stable internal kernel api. Why do we want
to provide this nice stable internal api to proprietary modules?

Regards,

Daniel