On Sat, 04 Sep 2010 08:59:02 -0400 Calvin Walton <calvin.walton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 11:03 +0000, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Miao Xie: > > > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(memcpy); > > > > I think you need to change that to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, because the code > > is now licensed under the GPL, and not the GPL plus kernel exceptions > > (whatever they are, but they undoubtly exist), unlike the original > > implementation. > > I wouldn't think so - the intent of EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL is to mark symbols > that make it obvious that a module was derived from the Linux kernel, as > opposed to some sort of generic driver that was just ported to a new > interface. (It's not foolproof, it's more of a warning to developers.) EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL was meant for symbols that were clearly internal workings. EXPORT_SYMBOL() doesn't in any way imply or excuse GPL compliance for any derivative work. Using the FSF memcpy seems a good technical idea, and it'll no doubt liven up the proprietary module makers lawyers as it'll make the FSF a party to any infringement disputes 8) Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
