linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/16] staging: m57621-mmc: delete driver from the tree.

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87r2ak18yy.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
Date:   Wed, 03 Apr 2019 06:51:49 +1100
From:   NeilBrown <neil@...wn.name>
To:     George Hilliard <thirtythreeforty@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Christian Lütke-Stetzkamp 
        <christian@...mp.de>, Nishad Kamdar <nishadkamdar@...il.com>,
        Sergej Perschin <ser.perschin@...il.com>,
        John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/16] staging: m57621-mmc: delete driver from the tree.

On Tue, Apr 02 2019, George Hilliard wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 5:32 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> wrote:
>
>> The license text in this driver is "interesting" and not really obvious
>> that it is supposed to be able to be distributed in the kernel source
>> tree.  Yes, the MODULE_LICENSE() text says GPL, so it's probably ok, but
>> to be safe, I am deleting this driver.  I will be glad to add it back if
>> the license is properly sorted out, but for now, this isn't worth the
>> potential risk, I should have never taken it in the first place.
>>
>
> So, for what it's worth, this driver has an obvious heritage of having been
> modified from the main Mediatek MMC driver. Now, of course it's *possible*
> to distribute GPL-incompatible changes to a GPL program, but the only
> *compliant* way to distribute these changes would have been the GPL.
>
> So there's a very good chance that it's intended to be GPL.  (Which is
> good, because I need this driver!)  I suppose we need to reach out to the
> original contributor.

People keep telling me that drivers/mmc/host/mtk-sd.c should be able to
handle the same hardware as this driver, with a little bit of work.
Unfortunately they haven't told me what the little bit of work involves.

Have you explored that possibility at all?  I might try to have a look
if I can make time.

NeilBrown

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (833 bytes)