From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 08:23:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 08:23:10 -0400 Received: from dvmwest.gt.owl.de ([62.52.24.140]:5896 "HELO dvmwest.gt.owl.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 08:22:59 -0400 Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:23:18 +0200 From: Jan-Benedict Glaw To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.9-ac6 Message-ID: <20010905142318.B20609@lug-owl.de> Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <3B9617BA.F771914E@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3B9617BA.F771914E@redhat.com>; from arjanv@redhat.com on Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 01:16:58PM +0100 X-Operating-System: Linux mail 2.4.5 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2001-09-05 13:16:58 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote in message <3B9617BA.F771914E@redhat.com>: > Alan Cox wrote: > > > based upon whether you have the source or not. What should logically taint > > > the kernel are modules that weren't compiled for that exact kernel version > > > or are otherwise mismatched. > > Setting a flag for the insmod -f required case as well is an extremely good > > idea. This is entirely about making information available nothing else and > > your suggestion there is a good one. > > How about making the "tainted" field a bitmask ? > eg bit 0 --> non GPL/BSD module > bit 1 --> insmod -f Basically, I don't like that idea. 'insmod -f' should only be required if the module in question is some kind of a commercial (TM) module. Setting a "GPL/BSD" flag might be somewhat interesting (but enlarges needed on-disk-space), but I don't like to help those commercials to ease the use of their broken, binary-only modules. MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw . jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481