On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 5:12 AM Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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
I can appreciate this benefit.
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.
I think this question implies that you are coming from the perspective
of "security" or wanting to restrict access to the underlying
functions, rather than wanting to clean-up the way symbols are handled
for manageability / maintainability purposes (which is the goal, as I
HOWEVER, I have one question: If these patches are included, and
someone wants to introduce a bit of code which needs to use two
symbols from different namespaces but with the same name, can that be
done? That is, if driver A has symbol 'foo' and driver B has symbol
'foo' (both in their respective namespaces), and driver C wants to use
A.foo and B.foo, can that be supported?