[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1bq9a5gxf.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 12:54:52 -0700
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, cornelia.huck@...ibm.com,
stern@...land.harvard.edu, kay.sievers@...y.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: namespace support requires network modules to say "GPL"
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
> On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 08:10:17 -0500
> Mark Lord <lkml@....ca> wrote:
>
>> > Now that we have network namespace support merged it is time to
>> > revisit the sysfs support so we can remove the dependency on !SYSFS.
>> ...
>>
>> Now that the namespace updates are part of 2.6.24,
>> there is a major inconsistency in network EXPORT_SYMBOLs.
>>
>> It used to be that an external network module could get away without
>> having to add a MODULE_LICENSE("GPL*") line to the source.
>>
>> In support of that, common networking functions (still) use EXPORT_SYMBOL()
>> rather than the more restrictive EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL().
>>
>> Eg. register_netdev(), sk_alloc(), __dev_get_by_name().
>>
>> But now, none of those three are actually usable by default,
>> because they all require "init_net", which is EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL().
Which alternative kernel does the above comment apply to?
> Then init_net needs to be not GPL limited. Sorry, we need to allow
> non GPL network drivers.
For the record network drivers should not be affected. As a practical
measure that just gets unmaintainable and it is unnecessary.
There are specific exceptions where network drivers mess with the userspace
interfaces where I do have some impact. However if you are messing
with our userspace interface especially with network namespaces in place
I don't see how it is possible for you to be anything other then a derivative
work, and something we need in tree to keep maintenance a manageable thing.
It should just be the core of the network stack that struct net has some
effect on.
> There is a fine line between keeping the
> binary seething masses from accessing random kernel functions, and allowing
> reasonable (but still non GPL) things like ndiswrapper to use network
> device interface.
Does ndiswrapper break? If so what dubious and unsupportable thing is
it doing?
Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists