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:	Thu, 19 Jun 2014 21:20:50 +0200
From:	Daniel Vetter <>
To:	Greg KH <>,
	Dave Airlie <>
Cc:	Rob Clark <>,
	Maarten Lankhorst <>,
	"open list:GENERIC INCLUDE/A..." <>,
	Thomas Hellstrom <>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	Thierry Reding <>,
	Colin Cross <>,
	Sumit Semwal <>,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: [REPOST PATCH 1/8] fence: dma-buf cross-device synchronization (v17)

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Greg KH <> wrote:
>> >> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()?  Same goes for all of the exports in here.
>> >> > Traditionally all of the driver core exports have been with this
>> >> > marking, any objection to making that change here as well?
>> >>
>> >> tbh, I prefer EXPORT_SYMBOL()..  well, I'd prefer even more if there
>> >> wasn't even a need for EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(), but sadly it is a fact of
>> >> life.  We already went through this debate once with dma-buf.  We
>> >> aren't going to change $evil_vendor's mind about non-gpl modules.  The
>> >> only result will be a more flugly convoluted solution (ie. use syncpt
>> >> EXPORT_SYMBOL() on top of fence EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()) just as a
>> >> workaround, with the result that no-one benefits.
>> >
>> > It has been proven that using _GPL() exports have caused companies to
>> > release their code "properly" over the years, so as these really are
>> > Linux-only apis, please change them to be marked this way, it helps
>> > everyone out in the end.
>> Well, maybe that is the true in some cases.  But it certainly didn't
>> work out that way for dma-buf.  And I think the end result is worse.
>> I don't really like coming down on the side of EXPORT_SYMBOL() instead
>> of EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(), but if we do use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() then the
>> result will only be creative workarounds using the _GPL symbols
>> indirectly by whatever is available via EXPORT_SYMBOL().  I don't
>> really see how that will be better.
> You are saying that you _know_ companies will violate our license, so
> you should just "give up"?  And how do you know people aren't working on
> preventing those "indirect" usages as well?  :)
> Sorry, I'm not going to give up here, again, it has proven to work in
> the past in changing the ways of _very_ large companies, why stop now?

Dave should chime in here since currently dma-buf is _GPL and the
drm_prime.c wrapper for it is not (and he merged that one, contributed
from said $vendor). And since we're gfx people everything we do is MIT
licensed (that's where X is from after all), so _GPL for for drm stuff
really doesn't make a lot of sense for us. ianal and all that applies.
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 -
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists