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:   Fri, 3 May 2019 20:49:05 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Jiri Kosina <>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>
cc:     Andy Lutomirski <>,
        Greg KH <>,
        LKML <>,
        Rik van Riel <>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <>,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <>,
        Dave Hansen <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>,
        Nicolai Stange <>,
        Paolo Bonzini <>,
        Radim Krčmář <>,
        Thomas Gleixner <>,,, Jiri Kosina <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: Remove the _GPL from the kernel_fpu_begin/end()

On Thu, 2 May 2019, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:

> Please don't start this. We have everything _GPL that is used for FPU
> related code and only a few functions are exported because KVM needs it.

That's not completely true. There are a lot of static inlines out there, 
which basically made it possible for external modules to use FPU (in some 
way) when they had kernel_fpu_[begin|end]() available.

I personally don't care about ZFS a tiny little bit; but in general, the 
current situation with _GPL and non-_GPL exports is simply not nice. It's 
not really about licensing (despite the name), it's about 'internal vs 
external', which noone is probably able to define properly.

If it would be strictly about license compatibility, that'd at least make 
us somewhat deterministic.

Jiri Kosina

Powered by blists - more mailing lists