Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 6 Dec 2011 19:13:18 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [tip:core/locking] lockdep, bug: Exclude TAINT_FIRMWARE_WORKAROUND from disabling lockdep |
| |
* Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> 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
| |