linux-kernel - Re: GPL question: using large contiguous memory in proprietary driver.

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: <3f43f78b0810141623s4282f9eof87014d2dee17810@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 14 Oct 2008 16:23:37 -0700
From:	"Kaz Kylheku" <kkylheku@...il.com>
To:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GPL question: using large contiguous memory in proprietary driver.

On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com> wrote:
> Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>
>> I have the following question. Suppose that some proprietary driver
>> (otherwise completely clean, based only on non-GPL symbols)
>
> The fact that it's not using GPL symbols does not actually mean that the
> driver is not a derivative work of the kernel (and thus subject to the GPL).

But thanks to the gracious tolerance of the kernel development
community, such drivers are permitted to exist. That is the question:
setting aside GPL chapter and verse, could that tolerance extend
to allow such a driver to get a piece of boot-time memory, and if so,
what mechanism would be tolerated?
--
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/