On Thu, 28 May 2015 21:18:44 +0200
"Luis R. Rodriguez" wrote:
> > As a nit, I would take out "have a preference to".
>
> Fine by me, do you need a new submission on my part of can you amend yourself?
I can tweak it on the way in.
Thanks,
jon
___
On Thu, 28 May 2015 11:56:01 -0700
"Luis R. Rodriguez" wrote:
> +Some maintainers and developers may however have a preference to
> +require EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() when adding any new APIs or functionality.
As a nit, I would take out "have a preference to".
>From what I can tell, there are
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:00:09PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 01:10:44AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > Great, thanks. This seems to be in alignment with those who have all along
> > said
> > they've used EXPORT_SYMBOL() to mean what EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() users no
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 01:10:44AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Great, thanks. This seems to be in alignment with those who have all along
> said
> they've used EXPORT_SYMBOL() to mean what EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() users now use it
> for. Nevertheless -- maintainers should know that some stubborn
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
wrote:
> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
>
> Current documentation over use case for EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()
> only acknowledges functions which are "an internal implementation
> issue, and not really an interface".
I.E. a statement of intent that this sy
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:56:19PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:17:36PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > ... while some of us consider that as pointless posturing and will refuse
> > > to merge such exports regardless.
> >
> > Can you elaborate why, for those maintainers
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:17:36PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > ... while some of us consider that as pointless posturing and will refuse
> > to merge such exports regardless.
>
> Can you elaborate why, for those maintainers not aware of such positions?
*shrug*
Either one states that all
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 09:07:49PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:56:01AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
> >
> > Current documentation over use case for EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()
> > only acknowledges functions which are "an internal implementation
> >
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:56:01AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
>
> Current documentation over use case for EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()
> only acknowledges functions which are "an internal implementation
> issue, and not really an interface". In practice these days
> though
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 01:09:23PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Thu, 28 May 2015 11:56:01 -0700
> "Luis R. Rodriguez" wrote:
>
> > +Some maintainers and developers may however have a preference to
> > +require EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() when adding any new APIs or functionality.
>
> As a
10 matches
Mail list logo
