netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] Adding GAUDI NIC code to habanalabs 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: <20200919064020.GC439518@kroah.com>
Date:   Sat, 19 Sep 2020 08:40:20 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@...il.com>,
        Gal Pressman <galpress@...zon.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, SW_Drivers <SW_Drivers@...ana.ai>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] Adding GAUDI NIC code to habanalabs driver

On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 03:19:05PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > So we do have an open-source library called hl-thunk, which uses our
> > driver and indeed that was part of the requirement.
> > It is similar to libdrm.
> > Here is the link:
> > https://github.com/HabanaAI/hl-thunk
> 
> Are you kidding?
> 
> This is mirror of some internal repository that looks like dumpster
> with ChangeId, internal bug tracker numbers, not part of major OS
> distributions.
> 
> It is not open-source library and shows very clear why you chose
> to upstream your driver through driver/misc/ tree.

It is an open source library, as per the license and the code
availability.  What more is expected here?

No distro has to pick it up, that's not a requirement for kernel code,
we have many kernel helper programs that are not in distros.  Heck, udev
took a long time to get into distros, does that mean the kernel side of
that interface should never have been merged?

I don't understand your complaint here, it's not our place to judge the
code quality of userspace libraries, otherwise we would never get any
real-work done :)

thanks,

greg k-h