On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 09:54:43AM +0200, Daniel Gomez wrote: > On 11/08/2025 07.18, Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Fri, 08 Aug 2025 15:28:47 +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > >> Christoph suggested that the explicit _GPL_ can be dropped from the > >> module namespace export macro, as it's intended for in-tree modules > >> only. It would be possible to restrict it technically, but it was > >> pointed out [2] that some cases of using an out-of-tree build of an > >> in-tree module with the same name are legitimate. But in that case those > >> also have to be GPL anyway so it's unnecessary to spell it out in the > >> macro name. > >> > >> [...] > > > > Ok, so last I remember we said that this is going upstream rather sooner > > than later before we keep piling on users. If that's still the case I'll > > take it via vfs.fixes unless I hear objections. > > This used to go through Masahiro's kbuild tree. However, since he is not > available anymore [1] I think it makes sense that this goes through the modules > tree. The only reason we waited until rc1 was released was because of Greg's > advise [2]. Let me know if that makes sense to you and if so, I'll merge this > ASAP. At this point it would mean messing up all of vfs.fixes to drop it from there. So I'd just leave it in there and send it to Linus. Next time I know where it'll end up.
