From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [62.89.141.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42C201AAE09; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 23:06:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1731625572; cv=none; b=m2lG4I1qEwCN2IGqq5QgzRN4JjatmdDMvSl92D1kYB48r0vMOxWDAW0PL0OwaHMliLASW5nPzsY9z03NgtF0IU8cnGXg29XL96HTi3ij+113ZJSHj9bghHOGLNpV+8MeJz5E/rtgaSA4sHp57Cj873ByQ/a+Yx0HH7DiaMaZP3o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1731625572; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wJRI4xRgfrY5VJtpilmqM1Vwv/3NX00NFAlgM7B7LDg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=CONUrXnMQ4dbQTUjK44hxSXDA1boZF9NFdGHF0+feU+9Nrx+o5JPwIPu1J+UHNGhstZycZW9GC04H0jcQBsxh7oUcGygwWJgXbJmduYKwRaBMvHobKOtKbFLRJs8ugpUMl9m147RY1ku7DWSzzK4Fd0ab3d9smaQesuMwbZ2wTk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b=L02ZK0hD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b="L02ZK0hD" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.org.uk; s=zeniv-20220401; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=BMw6PwJjMCAqkTCSaxzZzLEVq3+qMUjiYZSRnnbvSGE=; b=L02ZK0hDEjOAJgWyLmqZfn5jSl l2eT9/x09ihmINDRKWPcXETLH+EoPSZwe4Db3gl7/yhbbp5pyAV4o0ERRQjAaMvVSZPCl6GnfsZxx 1NphBqE1zGY0LxaASbtZfb+4fENp5tImZDJzpjGQwVUgcv3IHrwHwVhKjI9sa/2MXRj8bxkYnVqtw LfCY0eFbrBEVF7sBJjtw8X9xkBdEReU5pkA+yutExuolXP/PqO2S2vWlist881rooYc4qJlEIFZ0P i8+TYDMZW+P6dp4KuwXZUhEWXYr41RZUJe0HzXjf8Gg4pmDsOL1Xwzi6iC3yoro+btycNH3E6n0lL GvJQTx9w==; Received: from viro by zeniv.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tBiuX-0000000F78u-1Ply; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 23:06:01 +0000 Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 23:06:01 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Aaron Rainbolt Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , Luis Chamberlain , Werner Sembach , tux@tuxedocomputers.com, Petr Pavlu , Sami Tolvanen , Daniel Gomez , linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thorsten Leemhuis Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] module: Block modules by Tuxedo from accessing GPL symbols Message-ID: <20241114230601.GO3387508@ZenIV> References: <20241114103133.547032-4-ukleinek@kernel.org> <20241114103133.547032-6-ukleinek@kernel.org> <20241114131843.0df6a5a2@kf-ir16> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-modules@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20241114131843.0df6a5a2@kf-ir16> Sender: Al Viro On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 01:21:41PM -0600, Aaron Rainbolt wrote: > binary you get after compiling and linking. It looks to me like this > patch will prevent users from compiling Tuxedo's modules for personal > use on their own systems though. I personally dislike that for ethical > reasons - I should be able to use whatever code I legally obtain on my > system, and I don't like my use of Linux being wielded against another > open-source project by requiring them to relicense their code or no one > will be able to use their modules. I would question the "open-source" part here, TBH... I'm no fan of GPLv3 (to put it mildly), but I really wonder if that use of said license is in keeping with its, er, spirit. Ironic, that... Seriously, WTF had these folks had been thinking when they chose GPLv3 for a kernel module? I'm yet to see any coherent explanation - and the ones I have seen would be _really_ incompatible with the stated goals of GPLv3. To such a degree that I can't take them as anything plausible. Could somebody who'd been there at least explain the rationale for the license choice made back then?