From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759229Ab1JFUG7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2011 16:06:59 -0400 Received: from out3.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]:40570 "EHLO out3.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756876Ab1JFUG6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2011 16:06:58 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: yk1bkcKewQXVkeZVLW59ZD1q7ZRnMuxQumfV9Ipn2rEc 1317931617 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 13:06:52 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: Dave Jones , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: RFC: virtualbox tainting. Message-ID: <20111006200652.GA22225@kroah.com> References: <20111006190526.GA13883@redhat.com> <20111006194432.GA21642@kroah.com> <20111006195007.GA24900@redhat.com> <14371.1317930822@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <14371.1317930822@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 03:53:42PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 15:50:07 EDT, Dave Jones said: > > > I feel a bit dirty overloading TAINT_CRAP (even if the name is apropos). > > Should I introduce a TAINT_OUT_OF_TREE perhaps instead ? > > That would fix my biggest issue with the patch - it's a slippery slope. But if > we bite the bullet and go straight to the bottom of the slope with an > OUT_OF_TREE taint, I'd be happy with that. > > Is there a good way to identify at modprobe time if a module is in-tree or > out-of-tree? See my previous email, yes, we can do this. greg k-h