From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:32:34 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Non-GPL export of invalidate_mmap_range Message-Id: <20040218153234.3956af3a.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20040218230055.A14889@infradead.org> References: <20040216190927.GA2969@us.ibm.com> <20040217073522.A25921@infradead.org> <20040217124001.GA1267@us.ibm.com> <20040217161929.7e6b2a61.akpm@osdl.org> <1077108694.4479.4.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> <20040218140021.GB1269@us.ibm.com> <20040218211035.A13866@infradead.org> <20040218150607.GE1269@us.ibm.com> <20040218222138.A14585@infradead.org> <20040218145132.460214b5.akpm@osdl.org> <20040218230055.A14889@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: paulmck@us.ibm.com, arjanv@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Yes. Andrew, please read the GPL, it's very clear about derived works. > Then please tell me why you think gpfs is not a derived work. I haven't seen the code. > > But at the end of the day, if we decide to not export this symbol, we owe > > Paul a good, solid reason, yes? > > Yes. We've traditionally not exported symbols unless we had an intree user, > and especially not if it's for a module that's not GPL licensed. That's certainly a good rule of thumb and we (and I) have used it before. What is the reasoning behind it? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: aart@kvack.org