[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikVdm5bnXhGeg9rYsacWJsf_2s6A+b3iKJQeisD@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 13:50:30 -0800
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@...eros.com>
To: Gábor Stefanik <netrolller.3d@...il.com>
Cc: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
"Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" <inaky.perez-gonzalez@...el.com>,
Charles Marker <Charles.Marker@...eros.com>,
Jouni Malinen <Jouni.Malinen@...eros.com>,
Kevin Hayes <kevin@...eros.com>,
Zhifeng Cai <zhifeng.cai@...eros.com>,
Don Breslin <Don.Breslin@...eros.com>,
Doug Dahlby <Doug.Dahlby@...eros.com>,
Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
Subject: Re: Challenges with doing hardware bring up with Linux first
2010/11/21 Gábor Stefanik <netrolller.3d@...il.com>:
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 08:31:24PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> Which we know in practice they won't. They'll sit on fixes (often
>>> security fixes) and tweak and add private copies of features. In turn the
>>> Linux one could then only keep up by adding features itself - which would
>>> have to be GPL to stop the same abuse continuing.
>>>
>>> It's a nice idea but the corporations exist to make money and adding
>>> proprietary custom stack add-ons is clearly a good move on their part to
>>> do that.
>>
>> Hence my recommendation that if someone is going to do the work to
>> create a 802.11 layer that has shims that work on multiple operating
>> systems, it be GPL with explicit exceptions to allow said layer to
>> work on legacy operating systems like QNX, et. al. That way it forces
>> the hardware specific code to be released under the GPL --- if they
>> want to take advantage of the "write onces, work on multiple operating
>> systems" feature.
>>
>> If someone is going to go through all of this work to make it possible
>> --- particularly if it's at a company such as Luis's employer, or any
>> other wifi chipset provider --- why should it allow their competitors
>> to do closed source drivers? Better to structure the driver licensing
>> such that (a) there is benefit for companies to make a Linux driver by
>> using this common stack, and (b) but in exchange, it forces them to
>> make a driver which is guaranteed to be usable by Linux by virtual of
>> the fact that (1) the native interface is Linux's wireless stack, and
>> (2) the license forces them to GPL their driver.
>
> By forcing the driver to be GPL, you automatically exclude Windows
> from the list of platforms supported by such a cross-OS driver, as the
> Windows NDIS headers are AFAIK under a GPL-incompatible license, so no
> GPL driver can be written for Windows.
I've actually have been told GPL drivers for windows are possible with
some hard work. I have yet to investigate further on what that "hard
work" means. But yes, that is a good example.
Luis
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists