linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: Provide kernel fpu functions

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: <fbbd1e3d-6554-0d09-eba1-9e432e05746f@xen0n.name>
Date:   Mon, 6 Mar 2023 21:29:58 +0800
From:   WANG Xuerui <kernel@...0n.name>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
        Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
        Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
Cc:     Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...ngson.cn>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "loongarch@...ts.linux.dev" <loongarch@...ts.linux.dev>,
        "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Xuefeng Li <lixuefeng@...ngson.cn>,
        Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
        Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "loongson-kernel@...ts.loongnix.cn" 
        <loongson-kernel@...ts.loongnix.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: Provide kernel fpu functions

On 2023/3/6 20:53, David Laight wrote:
> ...
>> Also, if the old world is taken into consideration (which we normally
>> have the luxury of not having to do so), consider Ruoyao's case where a
>> commercial partner of Loongson wants to do this with the vendor kernel,
>> but the symbols are exported GPL -- in this case I doubt the GPL marking
>> will remain, thus creating inconsistency between upstream and vendor
>> kernels, and community distros are going to complain loudly about the
>> need to patch things. It's probably best to avoid all of this upfront.
> 
> It is pretty easy to load a non-GPL module into a distro-built
> kernel and call GPL-only functions.
> (And without doing horrid things with kallsyms.)
> As soon as you actually need to do one, adding others isn't a problem.

Hmm, do you mean patching the kernel downstream to remove the license 
checks, or something like that? I remember the so-called "GPL condom" 
trick was banned some time earlier, in commit 262e6ae7081df ("modules: 
inherit TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE"). For now I can't think of a way that 
would allow such reference...

-- 
WANG "xen0n" Xuerui

Linux/LoongArch mailing list: https://lore.kernel.org/loongarch/