message: unsupported module, tainting kernel
Hi, If I try to build any of my drivers (e100,e1000,bcm5700,vlan) in SuSE9, I am seeing the message "unsupported module, tainting kernel". But this is not creating any other problem. I want to know why is this message coming? Regards, Anil V Gangur Confidentiality Notice The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender at Wipro or Mailadmin@wipro.com immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 07.06, Anil V Gangur wrote:
Hi,
If I try to build any of my drivers (e100,e1000,bcm5700,vlan) in SuSE9, I am seeing the message "unsupported module, tainting kernel".
But this is not creating any other problem. I want to know why is this message coming?
From the file README.SuSE in the kernel documentation <quote> SUPPORTED VS. UNSUPPORTED MODULES As an extension to the mainline kernel, modules can be tagged as supported (directly by SUSE, or indirectly by a third party) or unsupported. Modules which are known to be flakey or for which SUSE does not have the necessary expertise are marked as unsupported. Modules for which SUSE has third-party support agreements are marked as externally supported. Modules for which SUSE provides direct support are marked as supported. </quote> If you want the warnings to go away, you can do echo "2" > /proc/sys/kernel/unsupported
Hi,
If I try to build any of my drivers (e100,e1000,bcm5700,vlan) in SuSE9, I am seeing the message "unsupported module, tainting kernel".
But this is not creating any other problem. I want to know why is this message coming?
It usually means that the module is commercial, non open-source, or perhaps doesn't conform to the GPL in some way. I know the e100 is like this and I get it with the linuxant driver for my wireless card. It will work OK, but the kernel will complain at you for using it. Some purists will just not use such code. David
Hi, On Wednesday 06 October 2004 14:06, Anil V Gangur wrote:
Hi,
If I try to build any of my drivers (e100,e1000,bcm5700,vlan) in SuSE9, I am seeing the message "unsupported module, tainting kernel".
But this is not creating any other problem. I want to know why is this message coming?
I thought I saw some reference after that message telling one where to find out more info... Anyway, it seems like it's not there... Try this: http://www.tux.org/lkml/#s1-18 -- - E - on SUSE 9.1 | KDE 3.3 | ASUS P4C800 Deluxe \ Pentium 4 3.0GHz | Tachyon G9600 PRO-M \ Transcend 2GB RAM | copperwalls was here ;) "There is going to be a resurrection." - Acts 24:15
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 07.33, - Edwin - wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 06 October 2004 14:06, Anil V Gangur wrote:
Hi,
If I try to build any of my drivers (e100,e1000,bcm5700,vlan) in SuSE9, I am seeing the message "unsupported module, tainting kernel".
But this is not creating any other problem. I want to know why is this message coming?
I thought I saw some reference after that message telling one where to find out more info... Anyway, it seems like it's not there... Try this:
The "unsupported module" tag is a SUSE extension, it isn't in the kernel.org kernel. Even GPL modules can be "tainted" in this scheme. The place to read more about it is in /usr/src/linux/README.SUSE (you'll need the kernel sources installed) Section "SUPPORTED VS: UNSUPPORTED MODULES"
Anders, Thanks! I just referred the README.SUSE file and I didn't see that particular section. My SuSE kernel version is 2.6.5-7.39 (SLES9.0). Thanks again, Anil -----Original Message----- From: Anders Johansson [mailto:andjoh@rydsbo.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 11:12 AM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] message: unsupported module, tainting kernel On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 07.33, - Edwin - wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 06 October 2004 14:06, Anil V Gangur wrote:
Hi,
If I try to build any of my drivers (e100,e1000,bcm5700,vlan) in SuSE9, I am seeing the message "unsupported module, tainting kernel".
But this is not creating any other problem. I want to know why is this message coming?
I thought I saw some reference after that message telling one where to find out more info... Anyway, it seems like it's not there... Try this:
The "unsupported module" tag is a SUSE extension, it isn't in the kernel.org kernel. Even GPL modules can be "tainted" in this scheme. The place to read more about it is in /usr/src/linux/README.SUSE (you'll need the kernel sources installed) Section "SUPPORTED VS: UNSUPPORTED MODULES" -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com Confidentiality Notice The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender at Wipro or Mailadmin@wipro.com immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 08.03, Anil V Gangur wrote:
Anders,
Thanks! I just referred the README.SUSE file and I didn't see that particular section. My SuSE kernel version is 2.6.5-7.39 (SLES9.0).
I'm afraid I don't have access to that package. The section is definitely in the README.SUSE from the 9.1 kernel source package
On Wednesday 06 October 2004 14:42, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 07.33, - Edwin - wrote:
[snipped]
The "unsupported module" tag is a SUSE extension, it isn't in the kernel.org kernel. Even GPL modules can be "tainted" in this scheme. The place to read more about it is in /usr/src/linux/README.SUSE (you'll need the kernel sources installed) Section "SUPPORTED VS: UNSUPPORTED MODULES"
Hmm... did you even check that link? ;) Anyway, it's *not* peculiar to SUSE. IOW, even if you're using a kernel compiled by, let's say Red Hat, you'll still see that message. -- - E - on SUSE 9.1 | KDE 3.3 | ASUS P4C800 Deluxe \ Pentium 4 3.0GHz | copperwalls was here ;) "He that is slow to anger is abundant in discernment, but one that is impatient is exalting foolishness." - Proverbs 14:29
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 08.09, - Edwin - wrote:
On Wednesday 06 October 2004 14:42, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 07.33, - Edwin - wrote:
[snipped]
The "unsupported module" tag is a SUSE extension, it isn't in the kernel.org kernel. Even GPL modules can be "tainted" in this scheme. The place to read more about it is in /usr/src/linux/README.SUSE (you'll need the kernel sources installed) Section "SUPPORTED VS: UNSUPPORTED MODULES"
Hmm... did you even check that link? ;)
Yes I did. Did you read what I wrote? To repeat, with emphasis added: ---> *The "unsupported module" tag* <--- is a SUSE extension. It is NOT part of the kernel.org kernel. The kernel.org kernel only taints a kernel if it isn't GPLed. SUSE's kernels introduce the concept of module support. In other words, a GPL module that is not supplied by SUSE will taint the kernel with the message in the original mail.
Anyway, it's *not* peculiar to SUSE. IOW, even if you're using a kernel compiled by, let's say Red Hat, you'll still see that message.
No I won't. I just checked, and red hat has not adopted that suse extension, at least not in fedora core 2. I have no idea what they do in their RHEL version.
On Wednesday 06 October 2004 15:28, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 08.09, - Edwin - wrote:
On Wednesday 06 October 2004 14:42, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 07.33, - Edwin - wrote:
[snipped]
The "unsupported module" tag is a SUSE extension, it isn't in the kernel.org kernel. Even GPL modules can be "tainted" in this scheme. The place to read more about it is in /usr/src/linux/README.SUSE (you'll need the kernel sources installed) Section "SUPPORTED VS: UNSUPPORTED MODULES"
Hmm... did you even check that link? ;)
Yes I did. Did you read what I wrote?
Yes :)
To repeat, with emphasis added: ---> *The "unsupported module" tag* <--- is a SUSE extension. It is NOT part of the kernel.org kernel. The kernel.org kernel only taints a kernel if it isn't GPLed. SUSE's kernels introduce the concept of module support. In other words, a GPL module that is not supplied by SUSE will taint the kernel with the message in the original mail.
Yes, I understand what you meant (or what the README) meant but...
Anyway, it's *not* peculiar to SUSE. IOW, even if you're using a kernel compiled by, let's say Red Hat, you'll still see that message.
No I won't. I just checked, and red hat has not adopted that suse extension, at least not in fedora core 2. I have no idea what they do in their RHEL version.
I just did a quick googling and it seems like the other distros have them too ;) http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=25401 http://www.applia.fr/contents/knoppix64.html Besides, IIRC, I had *exactly* the same wordings when I compiled the ASUS LAN drivers (found on the ASUS site) on the machine I'm using when it was still on RH9. Btw, a similar wording is found when you're using VMWare: https://www.redhat.com/archives/shrike-list/2004-February/msg00251.html You might want to check this as well: http://kerneltrap.org/comment/reply/3239/9383 Later, if I find a way to check it on RHEL (I have version 3), I'll check if the words come out exactly as it was on RH9. -- - E - on SUSE 9.1 | copperwalls was here ;) "These things I command you, that you love one another." - John 15:17
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 09.11, - Edwin - wrote:
On Wednesday 06 October 2004 15:28, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 08.09, - Edwin - wrote:
On Wednesday 06 October 2004 14:42, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 07.33, - Edwin - wrote:
[snipped]
The "unsupported module" tag is a SUSE extension, it isn't in the kernel.org kernel. Even GPL modules can be "tainted" in this scheme. The place to read more about it is in /usr/src/linux/README.SUSE (you'll need the kernel sources installed) Section "SUPPORTED VS: UNSUPPORTED MODULES"
Hmm... did you even check that link? ;)
Yes I did. Did you read what I wrote?
Yes :)
To repeat, with emphasis added: ---> *The "unsupported module" tag* <--- is a SUSE extension. It is NOT part of the kernel.org kernel. The kernel.org kernel only taints a kernel if it isn't GPLed. SUSE's kernels introduce the concept of module support. In other words, a GPL module that is not supplied by SUSE will taint the kernel with the message in the original mail.
Yes, I understand what you meant
It doesn't appear that you do
(or what the README) meant but...
Anyway, it's *not* peculiar to SUSE. IOW, even if you're using a kernel compiled by, let's say Red Hat, you'll still see that message.
No I won't. I just checked, and red hat has not adopted that suse extension, at least not in fedora core 2. I have no idea what they do in their RHEL version.
I just did a quick googling and it seems like the other distros have them too ;)
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=25401 http://www.applia.fr/contents/knoppix64.html
Those discuss non-GPL modules, not "unsupported modules"
Besides, IIRC, I had *exactly* the same wordings when I compiled the ASUS LAN drivers (found on the ASUS site) on the machine I'm using when it was still on RH9. Btw, a similar wording is found when you're using VMWare:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/shrike-list/2004-February/msg00251.html
that says "module license unspecified" not "unsupported module"
You might want to check this as well:
that discusses a binary only module. OK, it seems we have a misunderstanding here I am not claiming that kernel tainting as such is suse specific. I know all linux kernels that aren't too old have that concept HOWEVER: All other kernels only get tainted when you load a module that isn't GPLed (ok, yeah, if you force-load a module too). ONLY! No link you have posted have said anything about a GPL module being capable of tainting the kernel. They all discuss binary-only or otherwise non-GPL modules. You see the difference? SUSE has introduced a new concept: module support. This means that they tag their modules in a specific way, and when you load a third party module that does not have that tag, the kernel gets tainted and you see the message. This is so SUSE can easily see if you have done something that they don't officially support. So, to reiterate, it is NOT about tainting, it is about this particular kind of tainting.
Later, if I find a way to check it on RHEL (I have version 3), I'll check if the words come out exactly as it was on RH9.
Please do, and when you do, don't look just at the word "taint", look for the words "unsupported module"
On Wednesday 06 October 2004 16:16, Anders Johansson wrote: [snipped]
Yes, I understand what you meant
It doesn't appear that you do
I do, believe me :)
(or what the README) meant but...
Anyway, it's *not* peculiar to SUSE. IOW, even if you're using a kernel compiled by, let's say Red Hat, you'll still see that message.
No I won't. I just checked, and red hat has not adopted that suse extension, at least not in fedora core 2. I have no idea what they do in their RHEL version.
I just did a quick googling and it seems like the other distros have them too ;)
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=25401 http://www.applia.fr/contents/knoppix64.html
Those discuss non-GPL modules, not "unsupported modules"
Besides, IIRC, I had *exactly* the same wordings when I compiled the ASUS LAN drivers (found on the ASUS site) on the machine I'm using when it was still on RH9. Btw, a similar wording is found when you're using VMWare:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/shrike-list/2004-February/m sg00251.html
that says "module license unspecified" not "unsupported module"
You might want to check this as well:
that discusses a binary only module.
OK, it seems we have a misunderstanding here
Apparently...
I am not claiming that kernel tainting as such is suse specific. I know all linux kernels that aren't too old have that concept
HOWEVER: All other kernels only get tainted when you load a module that isn't GPLed (ok, yeah, if you force-load a module too). ONLY! No link you have posted have said anything about a GPL module being capable of tainting the kernel. They all discuss binary-only or otherwise non-GPL modules. You see the difference?
Yes. But, who mentioned anything about "binary-only" or "non- GPL" modules? ;) Besides, if you remember the original message, it talked about compiling one's own modules. Which, if I'm not mistaken, are most likely non-GPL modules. (But, of course, I'm just guessing here...)
SUSE has introduced a new concept: module support. This means that they tag their modules in a specific way, and when you load a third party module that does not have that tag, the kernel gets tainted and you see the message. This is so SUSE can easily see if you have done something that they don't officially support.
So, to reiterate, it is NOT about tainting, it is about this particular kind of tainting.
Yes, I understand your point.
Later, if I find a way to check it on RHEL (I have version 3), I'll check if the words come out exactly as it was on RH9.
Please do, and when you do, don't look just at the word "taint", look for the words "unsupported module"
Well, I guess it wouldn't be necessary at this point since the most likely words I'll find is something to this effect: "Warning: Loading %s will taint the kernel..." ( http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/168 ) I thought we're talking about the same thing but it seems like SuSE "extended" the idea and adapted a different "kind" of tainting. I wonder if the original message (found above) will ever come out in SuSE's warning messages... anyway... -- - E - on SUSE 9.1 | KDE 3.3 | ASUS P4C800 Deluxe \ Pentium 4 3.0GHz | Tachyon G9600 PRO-M \ Transcend 2GB RAM | copperwalls was here ;) "Maintain your conduct fine among the nations." - 1 Peter 2:12
Oops! On Wednesday 06 October 2004 16:54, - Edwin - wrote: [snipped]
I am not claiming that kernel tainting as such is suse specific. I know all linux kernels that aren't too old have that concept
HOWEVER: All other kernels only get tainted when you load a module that isn't GPLed (ok, yeah, if you force-load a module too). ONLY! No link you have posted have said anything about a GPL module being capable of tainting the kernel. They all discuss binary-only or otherwise non-GPL modules. You see the difference?
Yes. But, who mentioned anything about "binary-only" or "non- GPL" modules? ;) Besides, if you remember the original message, it talked about compiling one's own modules. Which, if I'm not mistaken, are most likely non-GPL modules. (But, of course, I'm just guessing here...)
The first part didn't sound right... It should have read: "Yes. But, who mentioned anything about 'a GPL module being capable of tainting the kernel'?" ;) Anyway... -- - E - copperwalls was here ;)
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 09.54, - Edwin - wrote:
I am not claiming that kernel tainting as such is suse specific. I know all linux kernels that aren't too old have that concept
HOWEVER: All other kernels only get tainted when you load a module that isn't GPLed (ok, yeah, if you force-load a module too). ONLY! No link you have posted have said anything about a GPL module being capable of tainting the kernel. They all discuss binary-only or otherwise non-GPL modules. You see the difference?
"Yes. But, who mentioned anything about 'a GPL module being capable of tainting the kernel'?"
I did
Besides, if you remember the original message, it talked about compiling one's own modules. Which, if I'm not mistaken, are most likely non-GPL modules. (But, of course, I'm just guessing here...)
Well, what the statistical odds are I can't say, but there are plenty of GPLed modules maintained outside the main kernel tree. But the part about GPL modules being able to taint was just to illustrate the difference between this type of tainting and the one you brought up in the links you posted. In the traditional scheme, any module not GPL (including BSD or LGPL licensed modules) will taint the kernel, and any module that is under the GPL will not. In this new scheme, any module not distributed by suse (or under agreement with them) will taint the kernel regardless of license. One scheme is about licenses, the other is about distributor and support deals.
SUSE has introduced a new concept: module support. This means that they tag their modules in a specific way, and when you load a third party module that does not have that tag, the kernel gets tainted and you see the message. This is so SUSE can easily see if you have done something that they don't officially support.
So, to reiterate, it is NOT about tainting, it is about this particular kind of tainting.
Yes, I understand your point.
Later, if I find a way to check it on RHEL (I have version 3), I'll check if the words come out exactly as it was on RH9.
Please do, and when you do, don't look just at the word "taint", look for the words "unsupported module"
Well, I guess it wouldn't be necessary at this point since the most likely words I'll find is something to this effect:
"Warning: Loading %s will taint the kernel..."
No, that's what modprobe/insmod will print. The kernel message is printed through klogd/syslogd so you should see it in /var/log/messages (or wherever red hat logs kernel messages)
( http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/168 )
I thought we're talking about the same thing but it seems like SuSE "extended" the idea and adapted a different "kind" of tainting.
exactly
I wonder if the original message (found above) will ever come out in SuSE's warning messages... anyway...
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:54:35 +0200
Anders Johansson
On Wednesday, 6 October 2004 09.54, - Edwin - wrote:
[snipped]
I thought we're talking about the same thing but it seems like SuSE "extended" the idea and adapted a different "kind" of tainting.
exactly
Yes, exactly. Anyway, thanks for the info! Being a "Red Hat baby" (since version 5) I just started using SuSE from 9.0 so I appreciate any info peculiar to SuSE's way of doing things :) -- - E - SUSE 9.1 | fluxbox 0.9.9-1 | G4 Dual 1.42GHz OS X 10.3 | VirtualPC 6.1 | copperwalls was here ;) "The righteous themselves will possess the earth, And they will reside forever upon it." - Psalms 37:29
participants (4)
-
- Edwin - -
Anders Johansson -
Anil V Gangur -
David Robertson