Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757936AbaFSTUx (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2014 15:20:53 -0400 Received: from mail-ie0-f179.google.com ([209.85.223.179]:33336 "EHLO mail-ie0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757570AbaFSTUu (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2014 15:20:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [84.73.67.144] In-Reply-To: <20140619181918.GA24155@kroah.com> References: <20140618102957.15728.43525.stgit@patser> <20140618103653.15728.4942.stgit@patser> <20140619011327.GC10921@kroah.com> <20140619170059.GA1224@kroah.com> <20140619181918.GA24155@kroah.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 21:20:50 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: GwuFBkoey5wVKWlXeG6Szgf_Ww4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [REPOST PATCH 1/8] fence: dma-buf cross-device synchronization (v17) From: Daniel Vetter To: Greg KH , Dave Airlie Cc: Rob Clark , Maarten Lankhorst , "open list:GENERIC INCLUDE/A..." , Thomas Hellstrom , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" , "linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org" , Thierry Reding , Colin Cross , Sumit Semwal , "linux-media@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Greg KH wrote: >> >> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()? Same goes for all of the exports in here. >> >> > Traditionally all of the driver core exports have been with this >> >> > marking, any objection to making that change here as well? >> >> >> >> tbh, I prefer EXPORT_SYMBOL().. well, I'd prefer even more if there >> >> wasn't even a need for EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(), but sadly it is a fact of >> >> life. We already went through this debate once with dma-buf. We >> >> aren't going to change $evil_vendor's mind about non-gpl modules. The >> >> only result will be a more flugly convoluted solution (ie. use syncpt >> >> EXPORT_SYMBOL() on top of fence EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()) just as a >> >> workaround, with the result that no-one benefits. >> > >> > It has been proven that using _GPL() exports have caused companies to >> > release their code "properly" over the years, so as these really are >> > Linux-only apis, please change them to be marked this way, it helps >> > everyone out in the end. >> >> Well, maybe that is the true in some cases. But it certainly didn't >> work out that way for dma-buf. And I think the end result is worse. >> >> I don't really like coming down on the side of EXPORT_SYMBOL() instead >> of EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(), but if we do use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() then the >> result will only be creative workarounds using the _GPL symbols >> indirectly by whatever is available via EXPORT_SYMBOL(). I don't >> really see how that will be better. > > You are saying that you _know_ companies will violate our license, so > you should just "give up"? And how do you know people aren't working on > preventing those "indirect" usages as well? :) > > Sorry, I'm not going to give up here, again, it has proven to work in > the past in changing the ways of _very_ large companies, why stop now? Dave should chime in here since currently dma-buf is _GPL and the drm_prime.c wrapper for it is not (and he merged that one, contributed from said $vendor). And since we're gfx people everything we do is MIT licensed (that's where X is from after all), so _GPL for for drm stuff really doesn't make a lot of sense for us. ianal and all that applies. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/