Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264532AbUD1ACd (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:02:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264531AbUD1ACc (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:02:32 -0400 Received: from wirefire.bureaudepost.com ([66.38.187.209]:24000 "EHLO oasis.linuxant.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264519AbUD1ACJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:02:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1083107550.30985.122.camel@bach> References: <20040427165819.GA23961@valve.mbsi.ca> <1083107550.30985.122.camel@bach> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v613) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <47B669B0-98A7-11D8-85DF-000A95BCAC26@linuxant.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: pmarques@grupopie.com, lkml - Kernel Mailing List , malda@slashdot.org, c-d.hailfinger.kernel.2004@gmx.net, Linus Torvalds , jon787@tesla.resnet.mtu.edu From: Marc Boucher Subject: Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:02:03 -0400 To: Rusty Russell X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.613) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2823 Lines: 77 Rusty, the workaround was done a while ago, back in the 2.5 days when your new module code was still very much in flux. It was necessary to have an effective short-term solution for the existing installed base (2.4), since we could not continue to confuse customers while waiting for the patch to propagate. In other cases, we have gladly submitted patches when we encountered bugs and could fix them. Had we known that the module fix was so simple, it would of course have been submitted it to you in parallel. Also since you and I have worked well together in other projects (netfilter core) and are long time friends, I don't understand why you are so quick to question my integrity in public. We didn't lie about anything; the license text is perfectly clear, and the political situation with Conexant's proprietary signal processing code outside of our control. Marc -- Marc Boucher Linuxant inc. On Apr 27, 2004, at 7:12 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Wed, 2004-04-28 at 02:58, Marc Boucher wrote: >> Actually, we also have no desire nor purpose to prevent tainting. The >> purpose >> of the workaround is to avoid repetitive warning messages generated >> when >> multiple modules belonging to a single logical "driver" are loaded >> (even when >> a module is only probed but not used due to the hardware not being >> present). > > You lied about the license, rather than submit a one-line change to > kernel/module.c. > > This shows a lack of integrity that I find personally repulsive. > > Name: Only Print Taint Message Once > Status: Trivial > > Only print the tainted message the first time. Its purpose is to warn > users that we can't support them, not to fill their logs. > > diff -urpN --exclude TAGS -X > /home/rusty/devel/kernel/kernel-patches/current-dontdiff --minimal > .22310-linux-2.6.6-rc2-bk5/kernel/module.c > .22310-linux-2.6.6-rc2-bk5.updated/kernel/module.c > --- .22310-linux-2.6.6-rc2-bk5/kernel/module.c 2004-04-22 > 08:04:00.000000000 +1000 > +++ .22310-linux-2.6.6-rc2-bk5.updated/kernel/module.c 2004-04-28 > 09:03:31.000000000 +1000 > @@ -1131,7 +1131,7 @@ static void set_license(struct module *m > license = "unspecified"; > > mod->license_gplok = license_is_gpl_compatible(license); > - if (!mod->license_gplok) { > + if (!mod->license_gplok && !(tainted & TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE)) { > printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: module license '%s' taints kernel.\n", > mod->name, license); > tainted |= TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE; > > -- > Anyone who quotes me in their signature is an idiot -- Rusty Russell > - 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/