From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8949BC432C3 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:58:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 206B3206E4 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:58:57 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 206B3206E4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 7DD4F6B0005; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:58:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 7B4D16B05BA; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:58:57 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 6F2CA6B05BB; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:58:57 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0199.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.199]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A6D76B0005 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:58:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1EBAE4DDB for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:58:57 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76224288714.28.tooth58_6b313d6dc0012 X-HE-Tag: tooth58_6b313d6dc0012 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4622 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf50.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:58:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gandalf.local.home (cpe-66-24-58-225.stny.res.rr.com [66.24.58.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 95A50205ED; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:58:45 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:58:42 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Primiano Tucci Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers , "Joel Fernandes, Google" , Andrew Morton , aneesh kumar , Carmen Jackson , Dan Williams , Daniel Colascione , jglisse@redhat.com, linux-mm , Mayank Gupta , Michal Hocko , Minchan Kim , mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, rcampbell@nvidia.com, Tim Murray , Linus Torvalds , Vlastimil Babka , Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [patch 026/158] mm: emit tracepoint when RSS changes Message-ID: <20191203105842.2e504fca@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: References: <20191201015030.MR-ux4mV1%akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20191202121415.1e64a461@gandalf.local.home> <20191202211345.GE17234@google.com> <20191202165601.42366c21@gandalf.local.home> <20191202234514.GR17234@google.com> <20191202185324.30b502bb@gandalf.local.home> <2084584347.3560.1575351504972.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:44:36 +0000 Primiano Tucci wrote: > Furthermore, from a pure technical viewpoint, dynamic linking is a major = pain > for many cross-platform projects because has different subtleties on each > platform. Most projects just ship big statically linked monoliths. > Having a LGPL dependency in Perfetto means telling them "if you want to u= se > this tracing project you need to change your build rules / packaging stra= tegy > and start dealing with dynamic linking on four different platforms > (Linux, Android, Mac, Windows)". This would be a show-stopper for our > project. > LGPL does not impose restrictions on having to be dynamically linked. You can legally statically link a LGPL project as well. There's no problem with that. You can do that with glibc too. The one reason I can see that Google wouldn't want to include it, is that you would also be required to maintain the library that you use. That is, if someone wants the source code of the library you are using, you must be able to provide it for them. That's the requirement that LGPL imposes. Now it is true that if someone wants to modify the LGPL library, enough must be distributed to allow the user to do that. But as your code is Apache, I'm guessing you can give people enough code to still do that. From: https://copyleft.org/guide/comprehensive-gpl-guidech11.html#x14-10100= 010.1 "There are, however, subtle differences and additions. For example not only is CCS required (as would be with normal versions of GPL), but also the CCS provided must enable a developer to regenerate the modified version of the entire combined work, using with a modified version of the LGPL=E2=80=99d work (as a replacement for the version a distributor provided). For example, LGPL=E2=80=99d code is statically link= ed to a non-copyleft executable, the required source code must also include sufficient material to split the distributed executable and relink with a modified version of the library." Thus, you are right that code licensed under LGPL is a "handle with care". But there's a lot of code under LGPL, I'm surprised that there's not better mechanisms to handle it. One solution I'm looking at is creating flex/bison templates to do the parsing. If we do this, those could be licensed under a different license that would make it easier for others to include this code. -- Steve