On 05/01/2018 at 14:48:04 -0800, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 01/05/18 05:05, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm definitively late to the party but...
> >
> > On 17/11/2017 at 11:00:33 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> +2. Style:
> >> +
> >> + The SPDX license identifier is added in form of a comment. The comment
> >> + style depends on the file type::
> >> +
> >> + C source: // SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>
> >> + C header: /* SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression> */
> >> + ASM: /* SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression> */
> >> + scripts: # SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>
> >> + .rst: .. SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>
> >> + .dts{i}: // SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>
> >
> > dtc doesn't handle // comments. This works in the kernel tree because
>
> dtc does handle // comments.
>
Hum, correct. I got a report saying it didn't and when I only checked
the COMMENT line of dtc-lexer.l. For whatever reason, I missed the
following line handling c++ comments.
I'll get back to the original report, trying to find why it was not
compiling.
--
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com
