linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 02/24] erofs: add superblock data structure in Rust

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: <aa7a902a-25f6-491c-88a3-ad0a3204d2ff@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 08:18:06 +0800
From: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Yiyang Wu <toolmanp@...p.cc>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org,
 LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/24] erofs: add superblock data structure in Rust

Hi Greg,

On 2024/9/17 01:55, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 09:56:12PM +0800, Yiyang Wu wrote:
>> diff --git a/fs/erofs/rust/erofs_sys.rs b/fs/erofs/rust/erofs_sys.rs
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..0f1400175fc2
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/fs/erofs/rust/erofs_sys.rs
>> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
>> +#![allow(dead_code)]
>> +// Copyright 2024 Yiyang Wu
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT or GPL-2.0-or-later
> 
> Sorry, but I have to ask, why a dual license here?  You are only linking
> to GPL-2.0-only code, so why the different license?  Especially if you
> used the GPL-2.0-only code to "translate" from.
> 
> If you REALLY REALLY want to use a dual license, please get your
> lawyers to document why this is needed and put it in the changelog for
> the next time you submit this series when adding files with dual
> licenses so I don't have to ask again :)

As a new Rust kernel developper, Yiyang is working on EROFS Rust
userspace implementation too.

I think he just would like to share the common Rust logic between
kernel and userspace.  Since for the userspace side, Apache-2.0
or even MIT is more friendly for 3rd applications (especially
cloud-native applications). So the dual license is proposed here,
if you don't have strong opinion, I will ask Yiyang document this
in the next version.  Or we're fine to drop MIT too.

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h