Re: Please revert 21564fd2a3deb48200b595332f9ed4c9f311f2a7

Alan Cox
2007-07-09T09:46:20Z

On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 19:46:46 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:

> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >>> Reverting is safe since it simply re-establishes the 2.6.21 status quo.
> >>>
> >> Well, not really. It breaks any non-GPL module when CONFIG_PARAVIRT is
> >> enabled, even though the same module would work fine otherwise. That's
> >> a pretty large regression.
> >> ...
> >>
> >
> > The 2.6.21 status quo can by definition not be a regression compared
> > to 2.6.21.
> >
>
> 2.6.21's behaviour was a bug. CONFIG_PARAVIRT is not supposed to cause
> any behavioural changes.

2.6.22's behaviour is the bug. 2.6.21 you couldn't load random binary
crap into the kernel without logging a taint. 2.6.22 you can. This means
every single 2.6.22 bug report has to be assumed to be caused by binary
module crap as a starting point which slows down debug immensely.

Alan