linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt

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]

Message-Id: <1177936139.4843.17.camel@lappy>
Date:	Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:28:59 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
	patches@...-64.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modules
	too

On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 13:19 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Monday 30 April 2007 13:15:36 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> > 
> > On Apr 30 2007 13:00, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >On Monday 30 April 2007 12:50:09 Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:28:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >> > 
> > >> > Otherwise non GPL modules cannot even do basic operations
> > >> > like disabling interrupts anymore, which would be excessive.
> > >> > 
> > >> > Longer term should split the single structure up into
> > >> > internal and external symbols and not export the internal
> > >> > ones at all.
> > >> > 
> > >> > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
> > >> 
> > >> Ingo was dead-set against this and I kinda agree. 
> > >
> > >The problem is that without this non GPL modules cannot even disable
> > >interrupts anymore. That is imho too radical.
> > 
> > Perhaps we can have a paravirt_ops2 that specifically deals with
> > interrupt en/disable, and export that instead?
> 
> Yes that is what the "Longer term ..." paragraph above refers to.
> However it would need some restructuring in the code.

FWIW I think doing this first will be better, exposing _all_ to non GNU
modules will weaken whatever case we might have to take it away later.

So, NACK from me too.

I don't want to hear the whining; but it was allowed in .22, so why
should we not be able to do this in .23.... or whatever.



-
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/