[lkml]   [2005]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Please open sysfs symbols to proprietary modules
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 07:07:21PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 03:23:30PM -0800, Patrick Mochel wrote:
> >>
> >>What is wrong with creating a (GPL'd) abstraction layer that exports
> >>symbols to the proprietary modules?
> >
> >Ick, no!
> >
> >Please consult with a lawyer before trying this. I know a lot of them
> >consider doing this just as forbidden as marking your module
> >MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); when it really isn't.
> There will be a GPL'd layer, and it's likely that sysfs interaction will
> be on the GPL'd side anyway, for purely technical reasons. But it does
> feel like circumvention of the limitations set in the kernel.

It is. And as such, it is not allowed.

> I thought it would be polite to ask the developers to lift those
> limitations, considering that they seem unfair and inconsistent with
> the stated purpose of EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL.

No, the stated purpose of that marking is to prevent non-GPLd code from
using those symbols. I don't see how you can state that using sysfs
files in your driver does not make it a "derived work" and force you to
make all of your driver GPL.

I suggest that you consult your company's lawyers for what to do here.

Good luck,

greg k-h
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 14:10    [W:0.082 / U:2.216 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site