[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:0.023 / U:2.724 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site