Re: [PATCH RFC] [1/9] Core module symbol namespaces code and intro.
From: Dave Jones <hidden>
Date: 2007-11-27 21:26:37
Also in:
lkml
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 10:09:42PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 02:00:37PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 10:25:33AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > > 1) Why is everyone so concerned that export symbol space is large? > > > - does it cost cpu or running memory? > > > - does it cause bugs? > > > - or are you just worried about "evil modules"? > > > > To clarify something here, by "evil", don't necessarily think "binary only". > > > > Out of tree modules are frequently using symbols that they shouldn't be. > > Because they get no peer-review here, they 'get away with it' for the most part. > > Until distro vendors push rebased kernel updates that removed exports that > > should never have been exported, and suddenly people like me get bombed > > with "Fedora broke my xyz driver" mails. > >... > > The real problem is that these drivers are not in the upstream kernel. You're preaching to the choir. > Are there common reasons why these drivers are not upstream? It varies case by case. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk