All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hector Martin <marcan@marcan.st>
To: re.emese@gmail.com
Cc: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	keescook@chromium.org, spender@grsecurity.net,
	pageexec@freemail.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] Add the latent_entropy gcc plugin
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 02:59:36 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a0e27065-afec-d82f-c478-1c311adaea3d@marcan.st> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20160524001529.0e69232eff0b1b5bc566a763@gmail.com

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Emese Revfy <re.emese@gmail.com> wrote:
> +/*
> + * Copyright 2012-2016 by the PaX Team <pageexec@freemail.hu>
> + * Copyright 2016 by Emese Revfy <re.emese@gmail.com>
> + * Licensed under the GPL v2
> + *
> + * Note: the choice of the license means that the compilation process is
> + *       NOT 'eligible' as defined by gcc's library exception to the GPL v3,
> + *       but for the kernel it doesn't matter since it doesn't link against
> + *       any of the gcc libraries
> + *
> + * gcc plugin to help generate a little bit of entropy from program state,
> + * used throughout the uptime of the kernel

The "Note" seems misleading. Since this is a GCC plugin, and directly
uses GCC's internal interfaces, doesn't that make it a derived work of
GCC, and thus, require that it be licensed under GPLv3 instead of GPLv2
(which is incompatible)?

AFAIK this is how the GPLv3 works in this context, and the GCC exception
doesn't change that because it only applies to libgcc and friends (and
does not weaken the default effects of the GPL over the rest of GCC). My
understanding is that the whole "eligible compilation" licensing hack
was designed to hinder non-linking proprietary compilation passes that
operate over data files containing an internal GCC representation, but
plain old loaded plugins still need to be GPLv3 regardless of whether
you link the end result to libgcc or not.

(Also, don't some arches link against libgcc, further complicating this?
Trying to use this compiler plugin with those arches would wind up with
non-redistributable kernels, this time due to the exception.)

-- 
Hector Martin (marcan@marcan.st)
Public Key: https://marcan.st/marcan.asc

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Hector Martin <marcan@marcan.st>
To: re.emese@gmail.com
Cc: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	keescook@chromium.org, spender@grsecurity.net,
	pageexec@freemail.hu
Subject: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] Add the latent_entropy gcc plugin
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 02:59:36 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a0e27065-afec-d82f-c478-1c311adaea3d@marcan.st> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20160524001529.0e69232eff0b1b5bc566a763@gmail.com

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Emese Revfy <re.emese@gmail.com> wrote:
> +/*
> + * Copyright 2012-2016 by the PaX Team <pageexec@freemail.hu>
> + * Copyright 2016 by Emese Revfy <re.emese@gmail.com>
> + * Licensed under the GPL v2
> + *
> + * Note: the choice of the license means that the compilation process is
> + *       NOT 'eligible' as defined by gcc's library exception to the GPL v3,
> + *       but for the kernel it doesn't matter since it doesn't link against
> + *       any of the gcc libraries
> + *
> + * gcc plugin to help generate a little bit of entropy from program state,
> + * used throughout the uptime of the kernel

The "Note" seems misleading. Since this is a GCC plugin, and directly
uses GCC's internal interfaces, doesn't that make it a derived work of
GCC, and thus, require that it be licensed under GPLv3 instead of GPLv2
(which is incompatible)?

AFAIK this is how the GPLv3 works in this context, and the GCC exception
doesn't change that because it only applies to libgcc and friends (and
does not weaken the default effects of the GPL over the rest of GCC). My
understanding is that the whole "eligible compilation" licensing hack
was designed to hinder non-linking proprietary compilation passes that
operate over data files containing an internal GCC representation, but
plain old loaded plugins still need to be GPLv3 regardless of whether
you link the end result to libgcc or not.

(Also, don't some arches link against libgcc, further complicating this?
Trying to use this compiler plugin with those arches would wind up with
non-redistributable kernels, this time due to the exception.)

-- 
Hector Martin (marcan@marcan.st)
Public Key: https://marcan.st/marcan.asc

             reply	other threads:[~2016-05-29 18:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-05-29 17:59 Hector Martin [this message]
2016-05-29 17:59 ` [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] Add the latent_entropy gcc plugin Hector Martin
2016-05-30  2:16 ` Kees Cook
2016-05-30  2:16   ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2016-05-30  3:46   ` Hector Martin "marcan"
2016-05-30  3:46     ` [kernel-hardening] " Hector Martin "marcan"
2016-05-30 15:40     ` Kees Cook
2016-05-30 15:40       ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2016-05-30 20:24       ` Hector Martin "marcan"
2016-05-30 20:24         ` [kernel-hardening] " Hector Martin "marcan"
2016-05-31 17:25         ` Kees Cook
2016-05-31 17:25           ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-05-23 22:14 [PATCH v1 0/3] Introduce " Emese Revfy
2016-05-23 22:15 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] Add " Emese Revfy
2016-05-23 22:15   ` Emese Revfy
2016-05-24 17:32   ` Kees Cook
2016-05-24 17:32     ` Kees Cook
2016-05-24 17:32     ` Kees Cook
2016-05-24 21:23     ` Emese Revfy
2016-05-24 21:23       ` Emese Revfy
2016-05-24 21:23       ` Emese Revfy
2016-05-24 23:40     ` PaX Team
2016-05-24 23:40       ` PaX Team
2016-05-24 23:40       ` PaX Team
2016-05-25  2:55       ` Kees Cook
2016-05-25  2:55         ` Kees Cook
2016-05-25  2:55         ` Kees Cook
2016-05-30 22:39         ` Emese Revfy
2016-05-30 22:39           ` Emese Revfy
2016-05-30 22:39           ` Emese Revfy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=a0e27065-afec-d82f-c478-1c311adaea3d@marcan.st \
    --to=marcan@marcan.st \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pageexec@freemail.hu \
    --cc=re.emese@gmail.com \
    --cc=spender@grsecurity.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.