From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] dynamic syscalls revisited
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 13:03:16 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1102356196.25841.204.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0412061026490.5219@montezuma.fsmlabs.com>
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 10:32 -0700, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
>
> I didn't know we were on a crusade to end all binary modules at all costs.
> Why not just make _all_ symbols in the kernel EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL then? I
> really believe this is taking things to new levels of silliness, we should
> also possibly consider adding code in glibc to stop proprietary
> libraries/applications from running. What do you think?
Personally? I don't really care. But what goes in the main linux kernel
is decided by Linus, and he doesn't want dynamic system calls because...
Back in 2000 Linus wrote:
The problem is that dynamic system calls are not going to happen.
Why?
License issues. I will not allow system calls to be added from modules.
Because I do not think that adding a system call is a valid thing for a
module to do. It's that easy.
It's the old thing about "hooks". You must not sidestep the GPL by just
putting a hook in place. And dynamic system calls are the ultimate hook.
Linus
And I was just trying to solve the one reason that I can understand why
Linus doesn't want dynamic system calls. If Linus had not stated this, I
would not be changing my original patch (which is still available and
doesn't do any of this nastiness).
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-12-06 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-29 15:11 [PATCH][RFC] dynamic syscalls revisited Steven Rostedt
2004-11-29 15:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-11-29 15:36 ` Steven Rostedt
2004-11-30 19:30 ` Kristian Sørensen
2004-11-29 16:41 ` [RFC] " Jan Engelhardt
2004-11-29 17:10 ` Steven Rostedt
2004-12-05 23:46 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-12-06 16:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2004-12-06 17:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2004-12-06 17:32 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2004-12-06 17:57 ` linux-os
2004-12-06 18:03 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2004-12-06 18:18 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-12-07 0:20 ` Michael Buesch
2004-12-07 0:57 ` Steven Rostedt
2004-12-06 21:14 ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-12-06 22:01 ` Steven Rostedt
2004-12-06 22:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-12-06 22:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2004-12-14 23:14 ` Werner Almesberger
2004-12-15 2:14 ` Steven Rostedt
2004-12-15 3:35 ` Steven Rostedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1102356196.25841.204.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zwane@arm.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.