linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/1] refcount: restore kref_get and kref

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: <20170308101215.GA15198@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Mar 2017 11:12:15 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
Cc:     john.hubbard@...il.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] refcount: restore kref_get and kref_put to non-GPL
 status

On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:59:33AM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03/08/2017 01:48 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:25:48AM -0800, john.hubbard@...il.com wrote:
> > > From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
> > > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > Say, I'm 99% sure that this was just an oversight, so
> > > I'm sticking my neck out here and floating a patch to
> > > Put Things Back. I'm hoping that there is not some
> > > firm reason to GPL-protect the basic kref_get and
> > > kref_put routines, because when designing some
> > > recent new (open-source, yay!) device drivers, we relied
> > > on this being available, even for MIT-licensed code.
> > 
> > MIT-licensed code should be just fine with GPL symbols, just use the
> > correct MODULE_LICENSE() setting and all is good.
> 
> Actually, we're still using this license string:
> 
>    MODULE_LICENSE("MIT");
> 
> which I understand does *not* grant access to GPL symbols. So I guess we'd
> have to switch over to "MIT/GPL", if I understand correctly, in order to be
> all correct here.

You need to write this as:
	MODULE_LICENSE("Dual MIT/GPL");
for the linker to handle this properly as that is the string it is
looking for.

thanks,

greg k-h