Anton Altaparmakov <anton@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hi, > > Is it intended that non-gpl file systems cannot use functions like > i_uid_read() and i_uid_write() (introduced by Eric Biederman in 3.5 > kernel)? > > They resolve to the below (in include/linux/fs.h): > > static inline uid_t i_uid_read(const struct inode *inode) > { > return from_kuid(&init_user_ns, inode->i_uid); > } > > static inline void i_uid_write(struct inode *inode, uid_t uid) > { > inode->i_uid = make_kuid(&init_user_ns, uid); > } > > And both from_kuid() and make_kuid() are EXPORT_SYMBOL() so they are > fine but the problem is that init_user_ns is EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() and > because i_uid_read() and i_uid_write() are static inline it causes > them to be unusable from non-gpl kernel modules... > > Same thing applies to i_gid_read() and i_gid_write(). > > These seem pretty fundamental calls that a non-gpl file system should > be able to call, no? I believe you are asking should a deriviative work of a GPL'd piece of software be licenseable under something other than the GPL. I don't see any provision in the GPLv2 for such a thing. I am pretty certain that kuid_t is unique to the linux kernel and any use of it makes your software a derivative work. All EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL does is provide a hint that the author could not imagine that you could possibly use it in something that was not a derivative work. EXPORT_SYMBOL makes no comment whatsoever. As long as you are complying with the license of the kernel I don't see how the question of a non-gpl file system can make any sense. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html