* Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > My primary worry is to not have lockdep active when there's > > binary modules in a system - can TAINT_OOT_MODULE be set but > > TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE not set for non-GPL modules? > > Yes. I imagine anyone wanting to use lockdep with binary modules > would just lie anyway. > > > If not, and if TAINT_OOT_MODULE set and TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE > > cleared guarantees the GPL-ness of the module then i have no > > problem with keeping lockdep active in that case. > > Insofar as nobody is making their code line about licenses. Fair enough - so i agree that we can allow OOT_MODULE's with lockdep and thus revert the lockdep-disabling effect of: 2449b8ba0745: module,bug: Add TAINT_OOT_MODULE flag for modules not built in-tree Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|