Re: incorrect taint of ndiswrapper

[Florin Malita <fmalita@gmail.com>]

Andrew Morton wrote:
> May be so.  But this patch was supposed to print a helpful taint message to
> draw our attention to the fact that ndis-wrapper was in use.  The patch was
> not intended to cause gpl'ed modules to stop loading (or if is was, that
> effect was concealed from yours truly).
>   
It's an unintended side effect of recent per-module-taint changes which
exposed the special nature of ndiswrapper & driverloader taints. Here's
where it went wrong:

Florin Malita wrote:
> No need to keep 'license_gplok' around anymore, it should be equivalent
> to !(taints & TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE).
>   

That turns out to be true for every module under the sun except
ndiswrapper & driverloader which are singled out and treated
differently: their proprietary taint has nothing to do with their license.

Randy's patch looks like a reasonable compromise to get them going again
- the alternative being the reintroduction of license_gplok or some
equivalent per-module flag just to support 2 hardcoded exceptions where
GPL incompatibility and proprietary tainting are not correlated.

---
fm
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/