Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262124AbVDMAiH (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:38:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262539AbVDMAhl (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:37:41 -0400 Received: from emailhub.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:30992 "HELO mailout.stusta.mhn.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S262124AbVDMAgH (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:36:07 -0400 Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 02:36:04 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.12-rc2-mm2 Message-ID: <20050413003604.GH3631@stusta.de> References: <20050408030835.4941cd98.akpm@osdl.org> <20050410224834.GK4204@stusta.de> <20050411151832.GA1301@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050411151832.GA1301@us.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2297 Lines: 61 On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 08:18:32AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 12:48:34AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > kernel-rcupdatec-make-the-exports-export_symbol_gpl.patch > > add-deprecated_for_modules.patch > > add-deprecated_for_modules-fix.patch > > deprecate-synchronize_kernel-gpl-replacement.patch > > deprecate-synchronize_kernel-gpl-replacement-fix.patch > > change-synchronize_kernel-to-_rcu-and-_sched.patch > > > > > > Please drop these patches. > > Please keep them! > > > Using these symbols in non-GPL modules is a legal problem at least in > > the USA except for IBM, > > Again, based on what line of reasoning? Again, the obvious lines > of reasoning do not apply. Shouldn't the IBM patents be enough reason to prevent everyone except IBM from using RCU in non-GPL modules? > > and all we've heard from IBM is that they are > > not 100% sure that there is really no binary-only module by IBM that > > might use these symbols. > > >From my earlier message (http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/4/4/244): > > Agreed, in that I know of no binary module that uses RCU. However, > I cannot -prove- that there is no such module. > > IOW, I am also not 100% sure that there is really no binary-only module > using these symbols by -anyone-, including someone -other- than IBM. > In addition, I know of no way that -anyone- could possibly be 100% sure > that there is really no binary-only module using symbols. Hence the > approach of providing the year "grace period" before transitioning to > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(). >... If kernel development was based on the assumption that every change that might break binary-only modules would need a one year "grace period", it was much different from how it's today... > Thanx, Paul cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - 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/