[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] module,bug: Add TAINT_OOT_MODULE flag for modules not built in-tree
    On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <> wrote:
    > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ben Hutchings <> wrote:
    >> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 01:40:44PM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
    >>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 6:12 AM, Ben Hutchings <> wrote:
    >>> > Use of the GPL or a compatible licence doesn't necessarily make the code
    >>> > any good.  We already consider staging modules to be suspect, and this
    >>> > should also be true for out-of-tree modules which may receive very
    >>> > little review.
    >>> >
    >>> > Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <>
    >>> > ---
    >>> > Debian has been carrying this for the last few kernel versions.  The
    >>> > recent thread '[RFC] virtualbox tainting.' and discussions at KS suggest
    >>> > that this might be more generally useful.
    >>> This indeed seems like a good idea to advocate getting things upstream
    >>> (not just staging) but what about the case where we have upstream
    >>> drivers from future kernels backported to older kernels and the newer
    >>> driver is simply provided as a feature for users who may need new
    >>> features / chipset support on their old distribution kernel?
    >> They continue to work without any loss of functionality.  (After the
    >> follow-up patches to keep dynamic debugging and lock debugging
    >> working.)
    > Great!
    >>> It seems this taint flag will be used for driers backported through
    >>> compat-wireless, the compat kernel module or any other backported
    >>> driver, even if it is indeed upstream and whereby kernel developer
    >>> *do* commit to actually fixing issues. In our experience
    >>> compat-wireless bugs *are real bugs*, not backport bugs so we do look
    >>> into them. In our latest linux-next.git based release for example
    >>> backport code consists only of 1.3804% of the code.
    >> Now you can look for (O) after the module name in a BUG/Oops message
    >> and you can tell whether the user really had the original or
    >> compat-wireless version of the driver.
    >> It is really up to each distributor or developer how they treat
    >> bug reports with the O taint.  When handling Debian bug reports I
    >> won't automatically reject such a tainted kernel but I will look
    >> carefully at the module list.
    > I'm working on getting my companies to abandon 802.11 proprietary
    > drivers for good. For Station mode of operation this is pretty much
    > mission complete. For AP products.. this is work in progress. The out
    > of tree flag is a good utility one can use to help justify working
    > upstream but if we treat any future-kernel-backported-driver equally
    > to any out of tree crap piece of shit driver, it seems to do unjustice
    > to the value of a properly upstream backported driver. I will note
    > that I put a lot of effort to ensure that the backport effort is
    > upstream-centric in an *extremely* upstream-biased way, see how I
    > label extra patches for tarballs [1]. If your patches are not upstream
    > the only way you get into these tarballs are by providing patches into
    > these directories:
    >  * pending-stable/ stable fixes from linux-next.git not yet on a stable release
    >  * linux-next-cherry-picks/ patches upstream but that won't go to the
    > stable release that we want to cherry pick
    >  * linux-next-pending/ patches posted on the public development
    > mailing list, patch not yet merged due to the maintainer being away on
    > vacation or whatever
    >  * crap/ patches not even posted publicly yet
    > Each tarball used also gets pegged with a letter if *any* patch from
    > any of these directories gets applied. The compat module, upon being
    > loaded, will also print the kernel ring buffer the exact release,
    > whether extra patches were provided, the upstream git tree used as
    > base and so on.
    > So -- although from a technical perspective this may mean Debian /
    > other kernel developers may ignore the taint flag for compat-wireless
    > it'd sure be nice to avoid it for them all together. Just can't think
    > of a way to do it yet... If you agree should we continue to think of a
    > way if its possible?
    > [1]

    How about a way to peg a driver as a backport from future kernels?
    Like maybe MODULE_COMPAT() ?

    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: 2011-12-12 23:53    [W:0.026 / U:3.668 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site