On Fri, Apr 20 2012 at 7:14pm -0400, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Sure Alan, seize on "proprietary" and "EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL".. and gloss > > right over the fact that what is being proposed is reasonable. > > I suggest you read the licence document. > > > Any multipath driver should be able to detach a scsi_dh module. As is > > evidenced by the fact that they can already make use of sysfs to do so. > > They can call the _GPL version if they are GPL, so there is no problem. > > > Relaxing the scsi_dh_detach interface makes it easier for a long > > standing proprietary driver to get out of Linux's way. > > So we are back to this being for a proprietary driver trying to link with > GPL code. > > > _Upstream_ has kept it that way because we've been concerned about > > breaking PowerPath in enterprises where Linux is deployed. Upstream has > > been good citizens to the fault of Linux. > > Not from where I am standing. It sounds like upstream has suffered for > the benefit of a dubious proprietary module. > > > > I'm a rights holder. Domain expertise isn't relevant here. The code I > > > provided is licensed under the GPL. Whether the symbol is EXPORT_SYMBOL > > > or EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL any derivative code (eg code that requires the > > > kernel be modified to match it) cannot call it. > > > > Remind me again when you ever developed anything to do with scsi_dh? > > It's part of the same kernel. It's GPL code. You can take your own code > and relicense it to be non GPL if you wish, but not mine nor Greg's nor > anyone elses. The scsi_dh maintainer (Chandra) acked the change. Hannes, the author of scsi_dh_attach, acked the change. You don't have a leg to stand on. Time for you to face that fact. > > To be clear: PowerPath doesn't _need_ this. Not even close. > > Then we don't need to apply it ? Thank you for clarifying that. > > > Linux is improved by not having to walk on egg shells that attaching a > > helpful linux-only layer in kernel will somehow screw up some 3rd party > > software that a customer values. > > That's a problem for Red Hat. Don't dump it on upstream. If the kernel > would work better with scsi_dh always attached we should always attach > it. It's the problem of the out of tree people how they cope. They'll > figure something out. > > And you still have the same confusion > > There is no "Linux only" magic in _GPL. Any derivative work of a GPL work > must be distributed under the GPL. You asserting something doesn't make it so. > > You still don't get it... yet you'll saber rattle behind generic GPL > > lawyer-up nonsense. > > This has gone far enough but it seems your management has already jumped > on it. Not my preferred way of handling such matters but Red Hat legal and > PR need to rein you in before you cause some serious damage. What the hell are you talking about? Please stop the insanity. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
