Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too

> FWIW I think doing this first will be better, exposing _all_ to non GNU
> modules will weaken whatever case we might have to take it away later.

I have no problems taking it away later again. Or rather taking
away the symbols where non GPL code clearly has no business messing
with.

I don't think that applies to save_fl/restore_fl/irq_disable/irq_enable 
though. Undecided yet about the page table manipulation code (set_pte etc.)


-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] [0/40] x86 candidate patches for review V: paravirt patches
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
    • From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
    • From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [linux-dvb] Re: Critical points about kernel 2.6.21 and pseudo-authorities
• Next by Date: Re: 2.6.21: ACPI related kernel panic
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
• Next by thread: RE: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modulestoo
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]