[cc += Ingo] On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 06:40:58AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 06:04:07AM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 07:24:13PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > My tolerance for ZFS is pretty non-existant. Sun explicitly did not > > > want their code to work on Linux, so why would we do extra work to get > > > their code to work properly? > > > > ZoL facilitates seamless r/w cross-mounting with macOS, something no > > other filesystem allows, and that feature is critical for me to work > > on Linux drivers for Mac hardware. Please don't make life harder than > > necessary for developers like me. Your "extra work" argument seems > > disingenuous to me, Sebastian's patch is causing extra work for > > ZFS developers, not the kernel community. The maintenance burden > > for the kernel community to retain the export is zero. > > Sorry, no, we do not keep symbols exported for no in-kernel users.
AFAICS the only other alternative would be to remove the _GPL from the export of kernel_fpu_begin()/end(). Those functions were static inlines until v4.2 when Ingo uninlined them with commit d63e79b114c0 (x86/fpu: Uninline kernel_fpu_begin()/end()). Ingo, why did you choose _GPL back then, given that the functions were not restricted to GPL before? Any objections to making them available to non-GPL again? As it stands, v5.0 removes the ability from non-GPL modules to use the FPU or SIMD instructions and that kills ZFS on Linux. This isn't hurting Oracle, they're not using OpenZFS, it's only hurting ZoL users. Thanks, Lukas
