On Sat, 2010-09-18 at 10:34 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:

On Sep 18, 2010, at 9:36 AM, Tabi Timur-B04825 wrote:

quoted

On Sep 17, 2010, at 10:14 PM, "Benjamin Herrenschmidt" [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 20:20 -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:

quoted

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?

quoted

quoted

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 :-)

I don't think either of these should be EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL.  Why
shouldn't a binary module be allowed to know these frequencies?  My
view is why preclude anyone from using this how they want.  If they
want to live in the gray area so be it.  Who am I to say they
shouldn't have that choice.

Well, I'm all for making binary modules life as hard as possible just
for the sake of it :-)

Cheers,
Ben.