From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752976Ab1LFSPL (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:15:11 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:37555 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752930Ab1LFSPH (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:15:07 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 19:13:18 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Alan Cox Cc: Nick Bowler , mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, tglx@linutronix.de, ben@decadent.org.uk, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tip:core/locking] lockdep, bug: Exclude TAINT_FIRMWARE_WORKAROUND from disabling lockdep Message-ID: <20111206181318.GA9842@elte.hu> References: <20111206151345.GA22353@elliptictech.com> <20111206154206.441e85c6@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20111206174320.GA25031@elte.hu> <20111206175230.2c5b2ea0@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111206175230.2c5b2ea0@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.3.1 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Alan Cox wrote: > > My primary worry is to not have lockdep active when there's > > binary modules in a system - can TAINT_OOT_MODULE be set but > > TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE not set for non-GPL modules? > > Yes. I imagine anyone wanting to use lockdep with binary modules > would just lie anyway. > > > If not, and if TAINT_OOT_MODULE set and TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE > > cleared guarantees the GPL-ness of the module then i have no > > problem with keeping lockdep active in that case. > > Insofar as nobody is making their code line about licenses. Fair enough - so i agree that we can allow OOT_MODULE's with lockdep and thus revert the lockdep-disabling effect of: 2449b8ba0745: module,bug: Add TAINT_OOT_MODULE flag for modules not built in-tree Thanks, Ingo