lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 12/12] RFC: watchdog: export core symbols in WATCHDOG_CORE namespace
From
Date
On 9/4/19 1:45 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 1:10 AM Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 04:06:38PM +0100, Matthias Maennich wrote:
>>> Modules using symbols from the WATCHDOG_CORE namespace are required to
>>> explicitly import the namespace. This patch was generated with the
>>> following steps and serves as a reference to use the symbol namespace
>>> feature:
>>>
>>> 1) Use EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS* macros instead of EXPORT_SYMBOL* for symbols
>>> in watchdog_core.c
>>> 2) make (see warnings during modpost about missing imports)
>>> 3) make nsdeps
>>>
>>> I used 'allmodconfig' for the above steps to ensure all occurrences are
>>> patched.
>>>
>>> Defining DEFAULT_SYMBOL_NAMESPACE in the Makefile is not trivial in this
>>> case as not only watchdog_core is defined in drivers/watchdog/Makefile.
>>> Hence this patch uses the variant of using the EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS* macros
>>> to export into a different namespace.
>>>
>>> An alternative to this patch would be a single definition line before
>>> any use of EXPORT_SYMBOL*:
>>> #define DEFAULT_SYMBOL_NAMESPACE WATCHDOG_CORE
>>>
>>> This patch serves as a reference on how to use the symbol namespaces.
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Matthias Maennich <maennich@google.com>
>>
>> As mentioned before, I am opposed to this set of changes. I don't see
>> the point of restricting the use of exported symbols in WATCHDOG_CORE.
>>
>> Guenter
>
>
> I agree.
>
> I do not like this patch set either.
>

Note that I don't object to the patch set in general. There may be symbols
which only need be exported in the context of a single subsystem or even
driver (if a driver consists of more than one module). For example, a mfd
driver may export symbols which should only be called by its client drivers.
In such a situation, it may well be beneficial to limit the use of exported
symbols.

I am not sure what good that does in practice (if I understand correctly,
a driver only has to declare that it wants to use a restricted use symbol
if it wants to use it), but that is a different question.

Guenter

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-04 14:13    [W:0.180 / U:4.628 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site