[ofa-general] Re: mlx4 violating radix tree API locking rules?

[James Lentini]

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:

> > Quoting Roland Dreier <rdreier at cisco.com>:
> > Subject: Re: mlx4 violating radix tree API locking rules?
> > 
> > By the way, in the past we've gotten push-back against using RCU in
> > dual GPL/BSD code.
> 
> I don't know what official Mellanox position is on this.
> I think that in this case it's OK, simply because 
> RCU here is just a requirement from radix tree code, not
> from mlx4 itself, so anyone who wants to use this code under BSD license,
> can just implement radix tree in a way
> that does not require RCU, and then rip out RCU calls.

I agree. I don't see an issue with the currect licensing terms. When 
the code is compiled as part of Linux, the code is licensed under the 
GPL.

> > I have no problem relicensing mlx4 to GPL-only and
> > then sticking in the rcu_read_lock() stuff to handle this I guess.
> 
> I don't see how that would help.
> 
> BTW I looked for BSD code in kernel today that uses RCU:
> $grep -i RCU `grep  -l 'source and binary forms' . -rI
> after manually filtering out words such as circular, gave me:
> ./net/sunrpc/auth_gss/auth_gss.c
> ./fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> ./drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_verbs_mcast.c
> 
> 
> -- 
> MST
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at lists.openfabrics.org
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> 
> To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>