linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Lang <dlang@diginsite.com>
To: Rob Wilkens <robw@optonline.net>
Cc: Ryan Anderson <ryan@michonline.com>,
	Linux kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: The GPL, the kernel, and everything else.
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 20:21:25 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301112006430.30519-100000@dlang.diginsite.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1042344930.1034.161.camel@RobsPC.RobertWilkens.com>

Rob, there are problems with your first statement here.

1. some developers are militant about not wanting to have binary drivers
(as is shown by this flamewar)

2. modules not only need to be called with the correct parameters, they
also need to do the proper locking. as locking evolves what needs to be
done by the module changes. This can only be solved by every module doing
locking 'just in casee' at which point the unessasary locking becomes a
significant performance issue (Larry McVoy has written a document about
why locking is bad and why excessive locking is very bad, search archives
for the link to his site)

3. you say that 'all that is needed' is to design an API that covers every
possible function a module needs. the problem is that if you try doing
this you end up with several results.

A. the API is very complex (since it does cover every possible
application)

B. the glue logic to translate the API to and from the internal kernel
implementations adds additional complexity (with probable errors) and robs
performance from the system (especially over time as the internel kernel
structures change)

C. the API includes a lot of things that are never used (remember it
covers everything you can think someone may possibly want to do, not just
the things that people actually do) unused code is a bad thing, it never
gets tested so bugs can live there for a LONG time, and it eats up memory
that the system should use for doing actual work.

4. since no designer (or group of designers) can think of everything your
API is going to be incomplete anyway. you can either pretend this isn't
the case and limit yourself to the things that you origionally imagined,
change your API (and now what do you do with things that used the
origional one, support two different versions of the API??? that's a
disaster for performance), or recognise up front that kernel modules are
very dependant on the exact implementation of the kernel internals at
which point it doesn't make sense to try and define a specific API, they
are just part of the kernel that's not always loaded (this is what Linux
has chosen to do)

as for signing kernel modules as being 'good' you have a serious problem
in the Linux world that there is no central authority to do any such
signing. the closest there is to that is when the module is made part of a
core source tree and then gets supported and maintained along with
everything else, but binary-only modules can't be done that way.

David Lang



 On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, Rob Wilkens wrote:

> Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 23:15:31 -0500
> From: Rob Wilkens <robw@optonline.net>
> To: Ryan Anderson <ryan@michonline.com>
> Cc: Linux kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: The GPL, the kernel, and everything else.
>
> On Sat, 2003-01-11 at 20:06, Ryan Anderson wrote:
> > Because, to a large extent, for the core kernel developers, the existing
> > system is fine.
>
> If you're designing a system for kernel developers use, then that's
> fine.  But if you want to see linux proliferate to the average desktop
> (and I do), then you've got to look at the bigger picture.  There
> _should_ be a way for a company like nvidia to build a binary driver,
> adn ship it in binary form, maybe even digitally signed the way
> microsoft allows digital signing of drivers so you know the driver is
> legit and OK.
>
> > progress.  ("Stream of consciousness" might not be a bad analogy)
>
> It's actually a good analogy.  What mailing list (if not the kernel
> mailing list) do I sign up for if I want to read about the design
> aspects of the kernel.  I realize and understand if this is an exclusive
> members-only list that doesn't allow the likes of me into its
> membership.
>
> > There is, but it's not CVS.  CVS has... issues when you get into complex
>
> I just read about bitkeeper in the "Virtual Memory Manager" document
> someone posted tonight (of all the places to learn about it)...
>
> Anyway, I've put that document aside, but will probably get back to it
> later.
>
> -Rob
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

  reply	other threads:[~2003-01-12  4:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-01-10 15:29 Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently" Larry Sendlosky
2003-01-11  1:58 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  2:07   ` Larry McVoy
2003-01-11  2:13     ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  2:17       ` Larry McVoy
2003-01-11  2:38         ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  2:41           ` Larry McVoy
2003-01-11  2:46             ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11 21:44           ` Kurt Garloff
2003-01-11 21:53             ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11 22:16               ` Chief Gadgeteer
2003-01-11 22:26               ` Kurt Garloff
2003-01-11 23:23                 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12  3:33                   ` Mark Mielke
2003-01-12  3:43                     ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12  4:19                     ` David Schwartz
2003-01-13 13:51                       ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-01-12  4:00                   ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-01-12  4:04                     ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12  7:47                     ` Chuck Wolber
2003-01-12 14:42                       ` Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company) Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12 16:45                         ` Alan Cox
2003-01-12 16:58                           ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12 17:54                             ` Alan Cox
2003-01-12 19:30                               ` Intel And Kenrel Programming Samuli Suonpaa
2003-01-12 19:46                           ` Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company) Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-01-11 22:36               ` Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently" Vojtech Pavlik
2003-01-11 22:57                 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12  1:06                   ` The GPL, the kernel, and everything else Ryan Anderson
2003-01-12  4:15                     ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12  4:21                       ` David Lang [this message]
2003-01-12  4:55                         ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12  5:10                           ` David Lang
2003-01-12  5:45                             ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12  5:12                           ` Stephen Satchell
2003-01-16 16:28                       ` Mark H. Wood
2003-01-16 16:41                         ` venom
2003-01-16 18:22                         ` John Alvord
2003-01-12 11:13                   ` Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently" Andrew McGregor
2003-01-12  1:44               ` [OT] Noise on lkml (was Re: Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently") J Sloan
2003-01-12  3:18                 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12  4:08                   ` Scott Murray
2003-01-11  3:26     ` Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently" Alan Cox
2003-01-11  2:54       ` Larry McVoy
2003-01-11  2:58         ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  3:11           ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2003-01-11  3:14             ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  3:16           ` John Adams
2003-01-11  3:35             ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  3:48               ` Hans Sgier
2003-01-11  3:55                 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  4:41               ` J Sloan
2003-01-11  4:44                 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  5:09                   ` Andre Hedrick
2003-01-11  5:12                   ` OT: Renaming the kernel??!?!?!? (Was Re: Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently") Brian Davids
2003-01-11 15:57                   ` Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently" Tom Sightler
2003-01-11  3:27           ` Brian Tinsley
     [not found]             ` <1042256385.1259.106.camel@RobsPC.RobertWilkens.com>
2003-01-11  4:16               ` Brian Tinsley
2003-01-11  3:52           ` yodaiken
2003-01-11  4:05             ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  5:45               ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-01-11  6:01           ` Tomas Szepe
2003-01-11 15:03             ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11 19:41               ` Andre Hedrick
2003-01-11 21:18                 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  6:32         ` Ryan Anderson
2003-01-11  2:55       ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-11  3:20   ` Tom Sightler
2003-01-11 19:48     ` Mark Mielke

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=Pine.LNX.4.44.0301112006430.30519-100000@dlang.diginsite.com \
    --to=dlang@diginsite.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robw@optonline.net \
    --cc=ryan@michonline.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).