On Saturday 24 November 2007 06:53:30 Andi Kleen wrote:
> This serves as a documentation
> on what is considered internal. And if some obscure module (in or
> out of tree) wants to use an internal interface they first have
> to send the module maintainer a patch and get some review this way.
So, you're saying that there's a problem with in-tree modules using symbols
they shouldn't? Can you give an example?
> I believe that is fairly important in tree too because the
> kernel has become so big now that review cannot be the only
> enforcement mechanism for this anymore.
If people aren't reviewing, this won't make them review. I don't think the
problem is that people are conniving to avoid review.
> Another secondary reason is that there are too many exported interfaces
> in general.
Probably, but this doesn't reduce it.
> Several distributions have policies that require to
> keep the changes to these exported interfaces minimal and that
> is very hard with thousands of exported symbol. With name spaces
> the number of truly publicly exported symbols will hopefully
> shrink to a much smaller, more manageable set.
*This* makes sense. But it's not clear that the burden should be placed on
kernel coders. You can create a list yourself. How do I tell the difference
between "truly publicly exported" symbols and others?
If a symbol has more than one in-tree user, it's hard to argue against an
out-of-tree module using the symbol, unless you're arguing against *all*
out-of-tree modules.
Sorry,
Rusty.
-
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/
[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]
