netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 00/16] Add Paravirtual RDMA Driver

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: <20160914225910.GB3567@obsidianresearch.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:59:10 -0600
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
To:     "Woodruff, Robert J" <robert.j.woodruff@...el.com>
Cc:     Adit Ranadive <aditr@...are.com>,
        "dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        pv-drivers <pv-drivers@...are.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Jorgen S. Hansen" <jhansen@...are.com>,
        Aditya Sarwade <asarwade@...are.com>,
        George Zhang <georgezhang@...are.com>,
        Bryan Tan <bryantan@...are.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/16] Add Paravirtual RDMA Driver

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:20:22PM +0000, Woodruff, Robert J wrote:

> >this new scheme works with >kernel.org 4.8, then it is possible
> >that it could go into that OFED-4.8 Release, but again, we are
> >still looking at the new scheme and evaluating how it affects >the
> >community OFED.
> 
> One other question.  Jason, the OFA (and its members) want to
> maintain the dual-license (BSD/GPL) for the code, as is the case for
> all the code that was in the OFA git trees on the OFA server that
> you pulled from.

The code in the OFA trees has a mixture of licenses. It is all GPLv2
compatible for sure, but there are at least three variations of the
'BSD' license. As far as I know, only the 2 clause OpenIB.org BSD
license is approved for use in OFA projects. Someone from the board
could correct me if I am wrong.

This means the 3 projects with the BSD patent clause, hosted on the
OFA servers, were already not conforming.

As is Intels HFI1 driver which uses a three clause BSD license.

> package follows that licensing model for accepting any new code into
> that combined repo ?

As with the kernel we'd discourage 're-licensing' existing files.

However, since this is not a OFA project, I, personally, would not
turn away a GPLv2 compatible contribution, but I am proposing that the
'default' license for the project be OFA compatible.

I think license enforcement of its members falls to the OFA.

Doug may feel differently.

Jason