linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] acpi_i2c: set MODULE_LICENSE, MODULE_AUTHOR, and MODULE

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:	Tue, 20 Aug 2013 11:14:42 +0300
From:	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Jerry Snitselaar <jerry.snitselaar@...cle.com>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi_i2c: set MODULE_LICENSE, MODULE_AUTHOR, and
 MODULE_DESCRIPTION

On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 01:00:08AM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> On Tue Aug 20 13, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 08:34:03PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > > On Tue Aug 20 13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Monday, August 19, 2013 04:35:29 PM Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > > > > On Tue Aug 20 13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > On Monday, August 19, 2013 09:16:14 AM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 06:26:35PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> > > > > > > > Without MODULE_LICENSE set, I get the following with modprobe:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > acpi_i2c: module license 'unspecified' taints kernel.
> > > > > > > > acpi_i2c: Unknown symbol i2c_new_device (err 0)
> > > > > > > > acpi_i2c: Unknown symbol acpi_dev_get_resources (err 0)
> > > > > > > > acpi_i2c: Unknown symbol acpi_dev_resource_interrupt (err 0)
> > > > > > > > acpi_i2c: Unknown symbol acpi_dev_free_resource_list (err 0)
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jerry Snitselaar <jerry.snitselaar@...cle.com>
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Looks good to me.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Acked-by: Mika Westerbeg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Well, OK, but do we need to be able to build that as a module?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Maybe it should just be yes or no?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Rafael
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Perhaps have depends on I2C=y and be a bool instead of tristate?
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, that's the idea.
> > > > 
> > > Does this look okay Mika?
> > > 
> > > [PATCH] acpi_i2c: do not build as loadable module
> > > 
> > > Change from tristate to bool, and depend on I2C=y
> > 
> > I'm not sure about this. Does the below mean that we can't build the ACPI
> > I2C enumeration at all if I2C core is compiled as module?
> 
> Yes, that was what Rafael was suggesting. If the ability to compile as
> a module if I2C is a module is needed, then we need the 1st patch.

In that case I would prefer the first patch. Otherwise we lose the ability
to enumerate I2C devices from ACPI namespace on some distros (at least
Debian builds I2C core as a module).

Rafael?
--
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/