public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox