OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » Re: namespace support requires network modules to say "GPL"
Re: namespace support requires network modules to say "GPL" [message #24300 is a reply to message #24296] Mon, 03 December 2007 18:57 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Daniel Lezcano is currently offline  Daniel Lezcano
Messages: 417
Registered: June 2006
Senior Member
Ben Greear wrote:
> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net> writes:
>>
>>  
>>> Ben Greear wrote:
>>>    
>>>> I have a binary module that uses dev_get_by_name...it's sort of a 
>>>> bridge-like
>>>> thing and
>>>> needs user-space to tell it which device to listen for packets on...
>>>>
>>>> This code doesn't need or care about name-spaces, so I don't see how 
>>>> it could
>>>> really
>>>> be infringing on the author's code (any worse than loading a binary 
>>>> driver
>>>> into the kernel
>>>> ever does).
>>>>       
>>
>> Regardless of infringement it is incompatible with a complete network
>> namespace implementation.  Further it sounds like the module you are
>> describing defines a kernel ABI without being merged and hopes that
>> ABI will still be supportable in the future.  Honestly I think doing so
>> is horrible code maintenance policy.
>>   
> I don't mind if the ABI changes, so long as I can still use something 
> similar.
> 
> The namespace logic is interesting to me in general, but at this point I 
> can't think of a way that
> it actually helps this particular module.  All I really need is a way to 
> grab every frame
> from eth0 and then transmit it to eth1.  I'm currently doing this by 
> finding the netdevice
> and registering a raw-packet protocol (ie, like tcpdump would do).  At 
> least up to 2.6.23,
> this does not require any hacks to the kernel and uses only non GPL 
> exported symbols.
> 
> Based on my understanding of the namespace logic, if I never add any 
> namespaces,
> the general network layout should look similar to how it does today, so 
> I should have
> no logical problem with my module.
> 
>> Once things are largely complete it makes sense to argue with out of
>> tree module authors that because they don't have network namespace
>> support in their modules, their modules are broken.     
> Does this imply that every module that accesses the network code *must* 
> become
> GPL simply because it must interact with namespace logic that is 
> exported as GPL only symbols?

That's right, with init_net's EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL and dev_get_xx, we 
enforce people to be GPL whatever they didn't asked to have the 
namespaces in their code.

Eric, why can we simply change EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL to EXPORT_SYMBOL for 
init_net ?


_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: [RFC][for -mm] memory controller enhancements for reclaiming take2 [0/8] introduction
Next Topic: [PATCH] memory.min_usage
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Aug 08 08:15:36 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02782 seconds