linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: Add new vma flag VM_LOCAL

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, 15 May 2018 06:50:56 -0700
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Boaz Harrosh <boazh@...app.com>
Cc:     Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
        Amit Golander <Amit.Golander@...app.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Add new vma flag VM_LOCAL_CPU

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:29:22PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 15/05/18 15:03, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > You're getting dangerously close to admitting that the entire point
> > of this exercise is so that you can link non-GPL NetApp code into the
> > kernel in clear violation of the GPL.
> 
> It is not that at all. What I'm trying to do is enable a zero-copy,
> synchronous, low latency, low overhead. highly parallel - a new modern
> interface with application servers.

... and fully buzzword compliant.

> You yourself had such a project that could easily be served out-of-the-box
> with zufs, of a device that wanted to sit in user-mode.

For a very different reason.  I think the source code to that project
is publically available; the problem is that it's not written in C.

> Sometimes it is very convenient and needed for Servers to sit in
> user-mode. And this interface allows that. And it is not always
> a licensing thing. Though yes licensing is also an issue sometimes.
> It is the reality we are living in.
> 
> But please indulge me I am curious how the point of signing /sbin/
> servers, made you think about GPL licensing issues?
> 
> That said, is your point that as long as user-mode servers are sloooowwww
> they are OK to be supported but if they are as fast as the kernel,
> (as demonstrated a zufs based FS was faster then xfs-dax on same pmem)
> Then it is a GPL violation?

No.  Read what Linus wrote:

   NOTE! This copyright does *not* cover user programs that use kernel
 services by normal system calls - this is merely considered normal use
 of the kernel, and does *not* fall under the heading of "derived work".

What you're doing is far beyond that exception.  You're developing in
concert a userspace and kernel component, and claiming that the GPL does
not apply to the userspace component.  I'm not a lawyer, but you're on
very thin ice.