|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

Posted Aug 1, 2020 6:47 UTC (Sat) by gioele (subscriber, #61675)
Parent article: Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

> With this patch applied, any module that imports symbols from a proprietary module is itself marked as being proprietary, denying it access to GPL-only symbols. If the shim module has already accessed GPL-only symbols by the time it gets around to importing symbols from the proprietary module, that import will not be allowed.

Will this have an impact on the ZFS module as well?


to post comments

Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

Posted Aug 2, 2020 14:20 UTC (Sun) by Baughn (subscriber, #124425) [Link] (13 responses)

ZFS isn't proprietary, so I don't see why it would.

Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

Posted Aug 2, 2020 14:35 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (12 responses)

> ZFS isn't proprietary, so I don't see why it would.

It could impact non-GPL compatible modules

Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

Posted Aug 2, 2020 19:11 UTC (Sun) by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325) [Link] (11 responses)

My question is, supposing this (or some future policy change) does impact ZFS, what will Canonical do about it? They're already distributing ZFS binaries, which is (maybe, depending on which lawyers you ask) a GPL violation in its own right. So will they bite the bullet and start shipping a modified kernel that doesn't enforce non-GPL taint? Or will they hack the hell out of the ZFS module to work around whatever the problem ends up being?

(I would also be very interested in seeing whether the GPLv2's freedom to modify implicitly overrides the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions, should this ever get litigated. GPLv3 has an explicit term overriding that, but the kernel's not under GPLv3...)

Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

Posted Aug 2, 2020 20:16 UTC (Sun) by nivedita76 (subscriber, #121790) [Link]

It should, the GPLv2 gives you authority to modify, so it gives you authority to circumvent, so DMCA shouldn't apply, since it has an exception if the copyright owner gave you permission. It would be a pretty bad look for the FSF or the Linux kernel trying to enforce DMCA against anyone, in any case.

(A) to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner

Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

Posted Aug 3, 2020 17:50 UTC (Mon) by rahvin (guest, #16953) [Link] (9 responses)

There are a lot of people that already believe Canonical's distribution of the CDDL licensed ZFS is already a copyright violation. The CDDL was specifically designed to prevent the code being merged and/or distributed with GPL code. Distributing the two together is already legally dangerous, I don't see how this kernel discussion impacts that.

Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

Posted Aug 3, 2020 23:38 UTC (Mon) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link] (8 responses)

> The CDDL was specifically designed to prevent the code being merged and/or distributed with GPL code.

Just like any other simplistic/anthropomorphic "Bigcorp X wants Y" statement, I expect this will never be proved one way or the other.

There was a great comment about this on this site about a few months back, I wish I were still using bookmarks...

Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

Posted Aug 4, 2020 1:06 UTC (Tue) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (6 responses)

Instead of rehashing the same discussion, here is one of the prior ones

https://lwn.net/Articles/676442/

CDDL compatibility

Posted Aug 4, 2020 18:20 UTC (Tue) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link] (5 responses)

Thanks, very useful! So this CDDL story is like pretty much everything on TV and social media: a tiny grain of truth that has been 1. ridiculously oversimplified, and 2. blown completely out of proportion.

I just found out how to save humanity (no less): propaganda classes in school. Very simple: Step 1, one student finds and tells a complex story in class. Step 2, small groups of students report it like it would be on social media or TV news. No, wait: they actually report it on social media, cause why not. Their grades are based on the number of likes and re-shares.

No they understand how the world works and are really prepared for adult life.

This new class is even compatible with pandemics and home schooling.

Immoral? No because unlike all the grown-ups doing this for profit all day long they unmask themselves a few weeks later, after they've been graded - educating not just themselves but all the people they fooled too. Plus the only way to discredit fake news is more fake news.

CDDL compatibility

Posted Aug 7, 2020 4:25 UTC (Fri) by liam (guest, #84133) [Link] (4 responses)

From Think Again: How to Reason and Argue

   I have taught courses on reason and argument for over thirty-five years at Dartmouth College and now Duke University. Many students tell me that my courses have helped them in various areas of their lives. They motivate me to keep going.
   While my students learned to argue, the rest of the world lost that skill. The level of discourse and communication in politics and also in personal life has reached new lows. During election years, my course has always discussed examples of arguments during presidential debates. During the 1980s, I had no trouble finding arguments on both sides in the debates. Today all I find are slogans, assertions, jokes, and gibes but very few real arguments. I see dismissals, put-downs, abuse, accusations, and avoiding the issue more than actual engagement with problems that matter. There might be fewer protests in the streets today than in the 1960s, but there are still fewer serious attempts to reason together and understand each other.


   My goal is to show what arguments are and what good they can do. This book is not about winning arguments or beating opponents. Instead, it is about understanding each other and appreciating strong evidence. It teaches logic instead of rhetorical tricks.

It's that last part that's really tricky.

CDDL compatibility

Posted Aug 7, 2020 8:10 UTC (Fri) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link] (3 responses)

What to expect when TV and social media are "free" (= you're the product) while education becomes more and more inaccessible.

The super rich need to wake up, pay taxes and fund education (and a few other things) as they used to do in the previous few decades. Quick before the next idiots start world war 3 somewhere.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weimar_Republic#Economic_...

It has to come from the top because the poor are unfortunately now too often too ignorant to even understand the numbers showing how much they're screwed.

CDDL compatibility

Posted Aug 8, 2020 23:26 UTC (Sat) by liam (guest, #84133) [Link] (2 responses)

Ah, you missed the first part. He's talking about the "elites" (Dartmouth & Duke).
My point in posting this was, one, your comment immediately brought it to mind, and two, virtually no one is adept at accepting a good argument and recognizing good data unless it can be easily incorporated into their worldview.
We give far greater scrutiny to the opposition than our allies. To do otherwise is exhausting and, possibly, bad for our well being. That's why it's so tricky.

CDDL compatibility

Posted Aug 8, 2020 23:58 UTC (Sat) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (1 responses)

And that's why, to really win an argument, you need to understand your opponent's. You never win an argument by telling your opponent they are wrong. You need to ask them questions, that throw their beliefs into question - "if you believe A, then surely B must be true too, no?" "no? Well if A is true, how come B isn't?".

If you've done it right, you now leave them questioning their own beliefs. At which point, you can explain your own. Just expect them to poke holes in your beliefs, just like you've done to them :-)

Cheers,
Wol

CDDL compatibility

Posted Aug 9, 2020 0:25 UTC (Sun) by liam (guest, #84133) [Link]

That's a good methodology if the goal is to win arguments.
What was interesting to me was the idea that rhetoric (not big "R"😂) could be genuinely helpful, and not simply a program for making an opponent submit.

Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules

Posted Aug 4, 2020 18:21 UTC (Tue) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]

I tried harder and found the great comment I was referring to:
https://lwn.net/Articles/817671/
> There is a tendency in these discussions to anthropomorphize large corporations. Which is dangerous, because it is grossly inaccurate to reality...

The keywords are "LWN antropomorphize corporations"
https://www.google.com/search?q=site:lwn.net+anthropomorp...


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds