linux-kernel - Re: Patenting kernel patches was Re: Re-implement MCE log ring buffer as per-CPU ring buffer

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:33:53 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: Patenting kernel patches was Re: Re-implement MCE log ring
 buffer as per-CPU ring buffer

> And also holding up perfectly good uncontaminated patches for something
> patented seems especially wrong.
> 
> I think we should move forward with a standard non patented ring
> buffer Ying was working on for this and avoid the patent mess as
> far as possible.

Agreed. If the future patches to be presented are useful and the
licensing usable etc then they can still be merged in the future (or far
future depending how much look folks have speeding up lawyers ;))

Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/