[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: DRM drivers with closed source user-space: WAS [Patch 0/3] Resubmit VIA Chrome9 DRM via_chrome9 for upstream
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:28:35AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I think "tightly integrated" could do with some clarification here.
> > qcserial was accepted despite not being functional without a closed
> > userspace component - an open one's since been rewritten to allow it to
> It got as far as staging with a good deal of complaint. I am not sure it
> would have gotten further unfixed (with my serial/tty maintainers hat
> on ;)). That however was about firmware - so a lot less tightly coupled.

? It was merged directly into drivers/usb/serial.

> > work. Do we define "tightly integrated" as "likely to cross the GPL
> > line" (potentially the case with Poulsbo, not the case with qcserial),
> > or is it a pragmatic issue? What about specialised hardware drivers that
> > only have closed applications?
> Ultimately - ask a lawyer, ultimately this is a question about works and
> copyright boundaries. If the hardware has only some specific proprietary
> app then it sounds to me like it's not a general kernel interface so
> probably isn't a good interface anyway, let alone what the code may do.

I was more wondering about whether we had issues with code that wasn't a
GPL concern but still depended on a closed component.

Matthew Garrett |

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-07-21 01:37    [W:0.047 / U:3.844 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site