Re: Dual-licensing LTTng, marker and tracepoints under GPLv2+/LGPLv2.1+

[Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@krystal.dyndns.org>]

* Frank Ch. Eigler (fche@redhat.com) wrote:
> Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@krystal.dyndns.org> writes:
> 
> > [...]  The goal we pursue by dual-licensing with GPLv2/LGPLv2.1 is
> > to permit instrumented applications to be themselves distributed
> > under other license than GPL. [...]
> 
> Is there some reason you can't just fork/copy off some earlier version
> of these files over which you had sole authorship (if any)?
> 

Actually, for LTTng, I own the copyright of almost everything we need.
Most files written by others are mainly the debugfs interfaces done by
Fujitsu. There is some derived work from RelayFS in
ltt/ltt-relay-alloc.c and include/linux/ltt-relay.h, where getting IBM's
approval would be good, but I think in the end this will end up being
only a few tens of lines.

> 
> > [...]The goal is to permit this library, which includes the
> > tracepoints, markers and LTTng features, to be used by userspace
> > applications and libraries so they can add static instrumentation
> > (as we currently do in the kernel). [...]
> 
> Just in case you're not aware, some API prior art for this is the
> dtrace sdt.h widget (already supported by systemtap), and of course
> it has no similarity to the various kernel tracing APIs.

Yep, we're aware of this. However, last time I checked, dtrace SDT used
a breakpoint even for their userspace tracing, which has a way too large
performance overhead for our needs.

Moreover, they support only very, very limited typing (0 to 5 u32). In
this respect, tracepoints and markers are much more flexible.

Thanks,

Mathieu

> 
> - FChE
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68