linux-kernel - Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers

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:	Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:25:57 +0100
From:	Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@...mix.at>
To:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Cc:	"linux-os (Dick Johnson)" <linux-os@...logic.com>,
	Manu Abraham <abraham.manu@...il.com>,
	Mws <mws@...sted-brains.org>, v j <vj.linux@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers

On Fri, 2007-02-16 at 03:19 -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
[...]
> Actually, the *real* reason embedded systems end up using old versions is
> much simpler.

ACK.

> They start developing their code on release 2.X.Y, and they keep their code
> out-of-tree.  Then, when they come up for air, and it's at 2.X.(Y+15), they
> discover that we weren't kidding when we shipped stable_api_nonsense.txt,
> and since their code isn't in the tree, they have to do all the API cleanup
> themselves, because no flock of nit-picking kernel janitor monkeys swarmed
> over their code and magically fixed it up for them.

Actually it is questionable for product development in a commercial
environment (especially in the embedded world where you usually have a
quite defined hardware and software on your device) if one actually
wants that - think of the "if it's not broken, don't fix it" reason.

> And unless Y+15 has some *very* compelling reasons to move forward, just
> sticking at Y suddenly starts looking very good, because watching somebody
> else's kernel janitor monkeys fix your code is fairly cheap, but paying your
> own kernel janitor monkeys gets expensive really fast....

It depends on the *very* compelling reason if it is easier/cheaper to
a) fix the problem in the "old" kernel,
b) backport something or
c) forward port the own drivers/changes.
And that decision depends on lots of factors (and company-internal
bureaucracy with the QA department may not be the least important).

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services

-
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/