"Brian F. G. Bidulock" wrote:
> Is you concern that LiS
> using a _GPL only facility will force GPL on modules linked with LiS
> even though LiS is LGPL?
No, my concern is that the kernel should be marked as
tainted when appropriate, thus giving volunteer kernel
hackers a change to decide if they want to help with an
oops from a tainted kernel.
For well-defined fundamental interfaces between genuinely
seperate works, I think using EXPORT_SYMBOL is more
appropriate than EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL.
Syscalls like putpmsg and getpmsg fall into this category,
even if wrapped in a thin layer to facilitate MP-safe
registration and deregistration.
The simple act of a LGPL module hooking two syscalls not
implemented by the standard kernel is IMHO no good reason
for marking the kernel as such tainted.
Best Regards,
Ole Husgaard.