Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
Alan Cox wrote: > On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:50:09 +0100 > Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: >> >>> Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations >>> like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. >>> >>> Longer term should split the single structure up into >>> internal and external symbols and not export the internal >>> ones at all. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >> Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. >> > > Ditto - do the work first then merge it. > The majority of paravirt_ops entrypoints are things which are currently exported as inline functions in headers anyway. There isn't a lot which would become available to modules under a CONFIG_PARAVIRT kernel which isn't already available to a non-CONFIG_PARAVIRT kernel. We can hide the few remaining entries, I suppose. But any module which used them would only work with a PARAVIRT kernel anyway, so its hardly going to be the best course for a module author - assuming they're at all useful anyway (ooh, look, we can activate an mm!). If we want to address this consistently, then we could scatter a pile of #ifndef MODULEs around the headers to make sure the inlines are not visible to modules in either case. And we could correspondingly nobble paravirt_ops by masking unexported entries with #ifndef MODULE. So it isn't worth worrying about the paravirt_ops export unless you also deal with the non-PARAVIRT case. J - 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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Monday 30 April 2007 16:55:48 Alan Cox wrote: > On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:50:09 +0100 > Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > > Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations > > > like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. > > > > > > Longer term should split the single structure up into > > > internal and external symbols and not export the internal > > > ones at all. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. > > Ditto - do the work first then merge it. Ok. Jeremy has come up with a ingenious simple solution. He promised a patch. -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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:50:09 +0100 Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations > > like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. > > > > Longer term should split the single structure up into > > internal and external symbols and not export the internal > > ones at all. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. Ditto - do the work first then merge it. NAK the patch - 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/
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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 13:19 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Monday 30 April 2007 13:15:36 Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > > > On Apr 30 2007 13:00, Andi Kleen wrote: > > >On Monday 30 April 2007 12:50:09 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > >> > > > >> > Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations > > >> > like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. > > >> > > > >> > Longer term should split the single structure up into > > >> > internal and external symbols and not export the internal > > >> > ones at all. > > >> > > > >> > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> > > >> Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. > > > > > >The problem is that without this non GPL modules cannot even disable > > >interrupts anymore. That is imho too radical. > > > > Perhaps we can have a paravirt_ops2 that specifically deals with > > interrupt en/disable, and export that instead? > > Yes that is what the "Longer term ..." paragraph above refers to. > However it would need some restructuring in the code. 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. So, NACK from me too. I don't want to hear the whining; but it was allowed in .22, so why should we not be able to do this in .23 or whatever. - 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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Monday 30 April 2007 13:15:36 Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > On Apr 30 2007 13:00, Andi Kleen wrote: > >On Monday 30 April 2007 12:50:09 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> > > >> > Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations > >> > like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. > >> > > >> > Longer term should split the single structure up into > >> > internal and external symbols and not export the internal > >> > ones at all. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. > > > >The problem is that without this non GPL modules cannot even disable > >interrupts anymore. That is imho too radical. > > Perhaps we can have a paravirt_ops2 that specifically deals with > interrupt en/disable, and export that instead? Yes that is what the "Longer term ..." paragraph above refers to. However it would need some restructuring in the code. -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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Apr 30 2007 13:00, Andi Kleen wrote: >On Monday 30 April 2007 12:50:09 Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: >> > >> > Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations >> > like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. >> > >> > Longer term should split the single structure up into >> > internal and external symbols and not export the internal >> > ones at all. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. > >The problem is that without this non GPL modules cannot even disable >interrupts anymore. That is imho too radical. Perhaps we can have a paravirt_ops2 that specifically deals with interrupt en/disable, and export that instead? Jan -- - 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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Apr 30 2007 11:50, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: >> >> Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations >> like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. >> >> Longer term should split the single structure up into >> internal and external symbols and not export the internal >> ones at all. >> >> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. So would I, as unimportant as I am in that virtualization area. Jan -- - 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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Monday 30 April 2007 12:50:09 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations > > like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. > > > > Longer term should split the single structure up into > > internal and external symbols and not export the internal > > ones at all. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. The problem is that without this non GPL modules cannot even disable interrupts anymore. That is imho too radical. -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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations > like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. > > Longer term should split the single structure up into > internal and external symbols and not export the internal > ones at all. > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. - 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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. Longer term should split the single structure up into internal and external symbols and not export the internal ones at all. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. - 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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Monday 30 April 2007 12:50:09 Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. Longer term should split the single structure up into internal and external symbols and not export the internal ones at all. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. The problem is that without this non GPL modules cannot even disable interrupts anymore. That is imho too radical. -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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Apr 30 2007 11:50, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. Longer term should split the single structure up into internal and external symbols and not export the internal ones at all. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. So would I, as unimportant as I am in that virtualization area. Jan -- - 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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Apr 30 2007 13:00, Andi Kleen wrote: On Monday 30 April 2007 12:50:09 Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. Longer term should split the single structure up into internal and external symbols and not export the internal ones at all. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. The problem is that without this non GPL modules cannot even disable interrupts anymore. That is imho too radical. Perhaps we can have a paravirt_ops2 that specifically deals with interrupt en/disable, and export that instead? Jan -- - 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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Monday 30 April 2007 13:15:36 Jan Engelhardt wrote: On Apr 30 2007 13:00, Andi Kleen wrote: On Monday 30 April 2007 12:50:09 Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. Longer term should split the single structure up into internal and external symbols and not export the internal ones at all. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. The problem is that without this non GPL modules cannot even disable interrupts anymore. That is imho too radical. Perhaps we can have a paravirt_ops2 that specifically deals with interrupt en/disable, and export that instead? Yes that is what the Longer term ... paragraph above refers to. However it would need some restructuring in the code. -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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 13:19 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: On Monday 30 April 2007 13:15:36 Jan Engelhardt wrote: On Apr 30 2007 13:00, Andi Kleen wrote: On Monday 30 April 2007 12:50:09 Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. Longer term should split the single structure up into internal and external symbols and not export the internal ones at all. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. The problem is that without this non GPL modules cannot even disable interrupts anymore. That is imho too radical. Perhaps we can have a paravirt_ops2 that specifically deals with interrupt en/disable, and export that instead? Yes that is what the Longer term ... paragraph above refers to. However it would need some restructuring in the code. 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. So, NACK from me too. I don't want to hear the whining; but it was allowed in .22, so why should we not be able to do this in .23 or whatever. - 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/
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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:50:09 +0100 Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. Longer term should split the single structure up into internal and external symbols and not export the internal ones at all. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. Ditto - do the work first then merge it. NAK the patch - 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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
On Monday 30 April 2007 16:55:48 Alan Cox wrote: On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:50:09 +0100 Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. Longer term should split the single structure up into internal and external symbols and not export the internal ones at all. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. Ditto - do the work first then merge it. Ok. Jeremy has come up with a ingenious simple solution. He promised a patch. -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/
Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules too
Alan Cox wrote: On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:50:09 +0100 Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive. Longer term should split the single structure up into internal and external symbols and not export the internal ones at all. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. Ditto - do the work first then merge it. The majority of paravirt_ops entrypoints are things which are currently exported as inline functions in headers anyway. There isn't a lot which would become available to modules under a CONFIG_PARAVIRT kernel which isn't already available to a non-CONFIG_PARAVIRT kernel. We can hide the few remaining entries, I suppose. But any module which used them would only work with a PARAVIRT kernel anyway, so its hardly going to be the best course for a module author - assuming they're at all useful anyway (ooh, look, we can activate an mm!). If we want to address this consistently, then we could scatter a pile of #ifndef MODULEs around the headers to make sure the inlines are not visible to modules in either case. And we could correspondingly nobble paravirt_ops by masking unexported entries with #ifndef MODULE. So it isn't worth worrying about the paravirt_ops export unless you also deal with the non-PARAVIRT case. J - 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/
