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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 12:09:59 +0200 From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>, Nicolai Stange <nstange@...e.de>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, zfs-devel@...t.zfsonlinux.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: allow kernel_fpu_{begin,end} to be used by non-GPL modules On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 02:42:04PM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > Prior to [1], all non-GPL modules were able to make use of SIMD on x86 > by making use of the __kernel_fpu_* API. Given that __kernel_fpu_* were > both EXPORT_SYMBOL'd and kernel_fpu_* are such trivial wrappers around > the now-static __kernel_fpu_*, it seems to me that there is no reason to > have different licensing rules for them. > > In the case of OpenZFS, the lack of SIMD on newer Linux kernels has > caused significant performance problems (since ZFS uses SIMD for > calculation of blkptr checksums as well as raidz calculations). > > [1]: commit 12209993e98c ("x86/fpu: Don't export __kernel_fpu_{begin,end}()") > > Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com> > Signed-off-by: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com> > --- > arch/x86/kernel/fpu/core.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/core.c b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/core.c > index 2e5003fef51a..8de5687a470d 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/core.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/core.c > @@ -127,14 +127,14 @@ void kernel_fpu_begin(void) > preempt_disable(); > __kernel_fpu_begin(); > } > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kernel_fpu_begin); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_fpu_begin); > > void kernel_fpu_end(void) > { > __kernel_fpu_end(); > preempt_enable(); > } > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kernel_fpu_end); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_fpu_end); No, please, we have gone over this before, we do not care at all about external kernel modules, ESPECIALLY ones that are not GPL compatible. greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists