Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 3 Sep 2003 16:52:16 +0200 | From | Jan-Benedict Glaw <> | Subject | Re: Driver Model |
| |
On Wed, 2003-09-03 10:36:16 -0400, Stuart MacDonald <stuartm@connecttech.com> wrote in message <002301c37228$bbc89950$294b82ce@stuartm>: > From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org > > [mailto:linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of > > Richard B. Johnson > > sources are available. If the driver does not contain the appropriate > > MODULE_LICENSE() string, then several tools will show "tainted" so > > If the MODULE_LICENSE() macro is what determines taint, what's to > prevent a company from compiling their driver in their own kernel tree > with that macro and releasing it binary-only? Wouldn't that module > then be taint-free?
To use it, you've to call it like
MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
The string (license name) you supply is stored into the module binary and checked ad module load time. Either it's "GPL" (or a few others IIRC) or it isn't. If it is, the module is GPL and (after you've shipped the module) any user can legally ask for sources (and you've to ship them). If it isn't GPL (or the other accepted variants), it'll taint the kernel. That'll tell us to not look at oopses, though...
MfG, JBG
-- Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481 "Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet! | im Irak! ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(IRAQ_WAR_2 | DRM | TCPA)); [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |