[PATCH] dma-buf: Use EXPORT_SYMBOL
Mauro Carvalho Chehab
mchehab at redhat.com
Wed Oct 10 18:11:19 PDT 2012
Em Thu, 11 Oct 2012 09:22:34 +1000
Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> escreveu:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 4:17 AM, Alan Cox <alan at lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:56:32 -0700
> > Robert Morell <rmorell at nvidia.com> wrote:
> >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL is intended to be used for "an internal implementation
> >> issue, and not really an interface". The dma-buf infrastructure is
> >> explicitly intended as an interface between modules/drivers, so it
> >> should use EXPORT_SYMBOL instead.
> > NAK. This needs at the very least the approval of all rights holders for
> > the files concerned and all code exposed by this change.
> I think he has that. Maybe he just needs to list them.
My understanding it that he doesn't, as the dmabuf interface exposes not only
the code written by this driver's author, but other parts of the Kernel.
Even if someone consider just the dmabuf driver, I participated and actively
contributed, together with other open source developers, during the 3 days
discussions that happened at Linaro's forum where most of dmabuf design was
decided, and participated, reviewed, gave suggestions approved the code, etc
via email. So, even not writing the dmabuf stuff myself, I consider myself as
one of the intelectual authors of the solution.
Also, as dmabuf will also expose media interfaces, my understaning is
that the drivers/media/ authors should also ack with this licensing
(possible) change. I am one of the main contributors there. Alan also has
copyrights there, and at other parts of the Linux Kernel, including the driver's
core, from where all Linux Kernel drivers are derivative work, including this one.
As Alan well said, many other core Linux Kernel authors very likely share
this point of view.
So, developers implicitly or explicitly copied in this thread that might be
considering the usage of dmabuf on proprietary drivers should consider
this email as a formal notification of my viewpoint: e. g. that I consider
any attempt of using DMABUF or media core/drivers together with proprietary
Kernelspace code as a possible GPL infringement.
More information about the dri-devel