Linking does not matter for the GPL. What matters it he legal concept of a derivative work. It just so happens that linking to a dynamic library bears a strong

Linking does not matter for the GPL. What matters it he legal concept of a derivative work. It just so happens that linking to a dynamic library bears a strong resemblance to a derivative work. LKMs and plugins in general are an entirely different matter. GPL software that supports plugins implicitly allows proprietary software to be loaded into it. That is why the FSF had been opposed to allowing plugins in GCC for years until competition from Clang required that they become more tolerant or face irrelevance. That being said, would anyone who believes this "linking to the kernel" argument please explain what linking actually means and how it is related to the GPL when the term "link" is not even present in the GPL?