On Sep 17, 2010, at 10:14 PM, "Benjamin Herrenschmidt" <b...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 20:20 -0500, Timur Tabi wrote: >> I don't see any reason to limit it to GPL drivers. Not only that, but >> then we'll have this: > > I do Can you elaborate on that, or are you just going to pull rank on me? > >> EXPORT_SYMBOL(ppc_proc_freq); >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ppc_tb_freq); >> >> That just looks dumb. > > Right, so send a patch to fix the first one too :-) Then why doesn't someone post a patch to change all EXPORT_SYMBOL to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? And why do we consider EXPORT_SYMBOL to be "broken"? I'm not trying to be a troll, but I see a lot of inconsistency with respect to EXPORT_SYMBOL and EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL. > _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
