[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license
On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 06:24:58PM -0400, Marc Boucher wrote:
> The inherent instability of binary modules is a religious myth. Any

No, it's REAL, unless VERY CAREFULLY handled. If your binary uses a
spinlock, it either works only on SMP or only on UP. If your binary uses
any number of kernel structures and interfaces, you are subject to the
whims of whomever compiled the kernel. spinlock debuging changes the
sizeof(spinlock_t). Some APIs become macros or inlines depending on
config options.

You have to toally separate all the kernel code from the binary code. If
you can't do that, you end up with a kernel module that works ONLY on a
very small subset of kernels. And that sucks. We don't want to encourage
that. If your driver manages to cleanly pull out all the binary gunk from
the kernel gunk, then kudos to you.

I still don't like it, but at least it has a chance of running.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.111 / U:5.528 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site