to
>> > audit the kernel tree for correct licenses. This patch adds these
>> > identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/ based on a script and data from
>> > Thomas Gleixner, Philippe Ombredanne, and Kate Stewart.
>> >
>> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner
>>
it/blob/833-espedexify/src/scancode/plugin_espedexify.py
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
rthand, which can be used
>> > instead of the full boiler plate text.
>> >
>> > This work is based on a script and data from Thomas Gleixner, Philippe
>> > Ombredanne, and Kate Stewart.
>> >
>> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner
>> > Cc: Kate Stewart
>
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 01:53:54PM +0100, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 05:53:01PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
>> &g
us on GPL first, ignoring BSD/MIT for now
- only take out unambiguous boilerplate that is matched exactly
- and only take it out if there a proper and corresponding
license identifier already there, or add one otherwise
[0] https://github.com/nexB/scancode-toolkit
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/LICENSES/other/X11?h=v4.18-rc5
[2]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/LICENSES/preferred/MIT?h=v4.18-rc5
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:38 PM, jacopo mondi wrote:
> Hi Philippe, Laurent, Geert,
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:36:31AM +0100, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Jacopo Mondi
>> wrote:
>> > Add driver for Renesas Capture Engine Unit
Paul:
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:59 PM, Paul Cercueil wrote:
> Hi Philippe,
>
> Le dim. 7 janv. 2018 à 17:18, Philippe Ombredanne a
> écrit :
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 7:25 PM, Paul Cercueil
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The GCW Zero (http://www.gcw-z
yle for .c should be //
> 3)
> for *.h, applied with "// " at head or within " /* */ " at head
> such as
> drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.h:1:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
This is a "style bug". The comment style for .h should be /**/
> 4)
> no is
ur
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
I know this can be confusing, but updating the MODULE_LICENSE tags
definitions in module.h to match SPDX tags is unlikely to happen as it
would create mayhem for everyone and every module loader relying on
this established convention.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
re, but not out of order with
actual patches to update the code and tooling and certainly not now.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
is program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> - * it under the terms of version 2 of the GNU General Public License as
> - * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> */
> #ifndef __LINUX_OF_GRAPH_H
> #define __LINUX_OF_GRAPH_H
> diff --git a/include/linux/of_pdt
Sean,
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 4:42 AM, Sean Wang wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-01-04 at 11:27 +0100, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
>> Sean,
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:40 AM, wrote:
>> > From: Sean Wang
>> >
>> > Enable pwrap and MT6380 on mt7622-rfb1
hould have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along
> with
> + * this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
> + */
Alexandre,
Would you mind using SPDx tags here like you did in
/drivers/clocksource/timer-atmel-tcb.c ?
Thanks!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
modify
>>> > +# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2
>>> > +# as published by the Free Software Foundation.
>>> > +
but then please DRY: do not add this extra legalese which is redundant.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
Gilad,
On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Philippe Ombredanne
> wrote:
>> Gilad,
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
>>> Replace verbatim GPL v2 copy with SPDX tag.
>&g
n devicetree
For the use of SPDX tags for the whole patch set: thank you!
Acked-by: Philippe Ombredanne
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
ROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
> + * OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
> + */
Icenowy,
This is a very long legalese indeed!
Do you mind using the new concise SPDX tags instead here and in the
rest of your patch?
See Thomas doc [1]
Thanks!
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/28/323
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
SE. See the
> + * GNU General Public License for more details.
> + */
Do you mind using an SPDX tag there instead of this fine legalese?
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
R ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR
> + * OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE,
> + * ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
> + * OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
Would you mind using an SPDX tag instead of this fine but long legales
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> +
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it would be useful, but
> + * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
> + *
> + */
Would you mind usin
> Signed-off-by: Sean Paul
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/drm/drm_hdcp.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT */
> +/*
> + * Copyright (C) 2017 Google, Inc.
> + *
> + * Authors:
> + * Sean Paul
> + */
Thank you++ for using the SPDX tags!
Acked-by: Philippe Ombredanne
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
Thank you++ for using the SPDX tags: here is my cheerful ack for this:
Acked-by: Philippe Ombredanne
+ * Davorin Mista
> + * Jolly Shah
> + * Rajan Vaja
> + *
> + * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> + */
This tag should be on the fist line as this:
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
Jolly,
On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 11:16 PM, Jolly Shah wrote:
> This patch adds CCF compliant clock driver for ZynqMP.
> Clock driver queries supported clock information from
> firmware and regiters pll and output clocks with CCF.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jolly Shah
> Signed-off-by: Rajan Vaja
> Signed-o
cense for more details.
> + *
> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> + * along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
> + */
Could you consider using the new SDPX tags [1] instead of this long legalese?
Thanks!
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/28/323
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
ame thing in the
MODULE_LICENSE and your SPDX tags.
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
[2]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/module.h#n175
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
ot;); would mean GPL-2.0+ (e.g. or any
later version) and this would not match your top level license tag.
I know this may seem confusing, but there is little hope we can change
the MODULE_LICENSE tags that are used by many external module loaders.
Comments in module.h explain it all.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
Tejun,
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 7:41 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 10:24:18PM -0700, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
>> > v2:
>> > - clarify license version (it should be GPL 2.0)
>> > - use SPDX header
>>
>> For the use of SP
It checks whether the license expression syntax is correct and also
> validates whether the license identifiers used in the expressions are
> available in the LICENSES files.
Looking good to me! And the use of ply is sleek.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
Miroslav,
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 3:54 AM, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Feb 2018, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
>
>> Joe,
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Joe Lawrence
>> wrote:
>> > Add a simple atomic replace / cumulative livepatch example
006-2007 Pavel Pisa (pp...@pikron.com)
>> +// Copyright (C) 2008 Juergen Beisert (ker...@pengutronix.de)
>
> Hi Philippe,
>
> I went through the code and didn't find any information about the format
> of the lines following the SPDX, it seems it is relatively free.
>
TIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION
> >
> > --
> > 2.27.0
> >
>
> You can't change the text of a license that comes from elsewhere. This
> file is fine as-is.
It is so fine that -FWIW- even the Apache folks toyed with the idea of
updating their license text to switch to HTTPS there and decided not
to [1] which is IMHO a sane thing.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-457
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
ll meant, but ill defined, distinction between "GPL"
> and "GPL v2" and document that:
>
> - "GPL" and "GPL v2" both express that the module is licensed under GPLv2
> (without a distinction of 'only' and 'or later') and is t
ech E-Matrix 530 expansion card).
>
> Thanks to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz and Michael Schmitz for help
> with testing the driver.
>
> Tested-by: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> Cc: Michael Schmitz
> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven
> Cc: Philippe Ombredanne
> Cc: Andy Shevchenko
>
e is free software or
> not.
>
> Add a MODULE_LICENSE subsection to the license rule documentation as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Thank you ++ for documenting all this : this is a small change but a big
step towards licensing clarity! Great that you found the com
arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77965.dtsi
>> @@ -0,0 +1,495 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.
This should be GPL-2.0 too.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
tag (in the proper style as explained
in the doc), you can remove this boilerplate alright as it does double
duty with the tag.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
ounds the style should be plain /*
SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 /* here per [1]
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
nse-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR MIT) line in a less clear and
precise way.
The whole purpose of the SPDX things is to make licensing eventually
as clear ass possible
Thanks!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
ree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
"ASoC CPCAP codec driver");
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Sebastian Reichel");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
This does not match your license: per module.h, GPL means GPL-2.0 or
later. You notice above is GPL-2.0, not "or later"
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
Daniel,
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 4:34 PM, Daniel Lezcano
wrote:
> For license auditing purpose, let's add the SPDX tag.
>
> Cc: Philippe Ombredanne
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano
> ---
> drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 16 +---
> 1 file changed, 1
L-2.0-or-later
>> and GPL-2.0-only later, and kernel sources will likely then get patched in
>> one
>> go.
>
> + Philippe O. to check what I'm writing just below.
>
> In -next branch I only see reference to GPL-2.0+ identifier so for me
> it fine to use it here.
> Is that right ? or should we use GPL-2.0-or-later keyword ?
Sorry for the late reply!
IMHO it is essential to stick to what is in the kernel doc, meaning
that you should not use the GPL-2.0-or-later identifier until it is
part of the kernel doc. Otherwise this is going to be a mess ;)
Consistency matters a lot.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
.
This is the way to go when there are ambiguities alright. One
interpretation of a bare GPL is GPL-1.0+ but the context matters a
lot!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
re
GPL-2.0+ rather than a less common GPL-1.0+
Thank you for your efforts there!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
or System z
> *
> @@ -5,8 +6,6 @@
> *
> * Author(s):
> * Jan Glauber
> - *
> - * License: GPL
> */
>
> #define KMSG_COMPONENT "zpci"
Thanks!
I have CCed too: Jan Glauber too just in case!
Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne
he file type.
>
> Cc: Andy Whitcroft
> Cc: Joe Perches
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner
> Cc: Philippe Ombredanne
> Cc: Andrew Morton
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring
Acked-by: Philippe Ombredanne
(Sorry for the late reply but I was busy with FOSDEM)
. and until we update ALL the GPL-2.0 to
GPL-2.0-only eventually which is best done at once. Otherwise, this is
going to be a total mess on top of a complicated topic that requires
quite a bit of maintainer energy!
[1] https://github.com/nexB/license-expression/
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
s I
could. One id for one license at a time is the only sane way to go.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
ken as legal advice or not,
> but I would expect that a warning about unmatched license type does not
> constitute legal advice.
>
> Is it too optimistic? :-D
That's very reasonable IMHO and this not legal advice alright to me.
This would be just a tool that warns you that your license expression
does not match known licenses in the kernel.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
gt; Cc: Mark Brown
> Cc: Matthias Brugger
> Cc: Philippe Ombredanne
Thank you for the use of SPDX licenses ids!
Acked-by: Philippe Ombredanne
tion) any later version.
> - *
> * Modified by Philippe Cornu
> * This generic Synopsys DesignWare MIPI DSI host driver is based on the
> * Rockchip version from rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi.c with phy & bridge APIs.
> --
> 2.15.1
>
Thank you.
Acked-by: Philippe Ombredanne
Joe,
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 6:24 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 15:35 +0100, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
>> However checking that licenses ids are known and listed in the kernel
>> doc is essential IMHO to avoid drift and insulate the kernel from SPDX
>> u
les.rst. To summarize, SPDX license tags
>> > should be on the 1st line (or 2nd line in scripts) using the appropriate
>> > comment style for the file type.
>> >
>> > Cc: Andy Whitcroft
>> > Cc: Joe Perches
>> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner
>> > C
1] :
please use one of these:
BSD-2-Clause or BSD-3-Clause
Thank you!
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/LICENSES/preferred
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
files ;)
The (still new and fresh) license documentation contributed by tglx
--the only real-time docu-mentalist-- is in:
Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
Thanks!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
aving trees at the same time!
[1]
https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2014-4-july-august/green-life/how-much-paper-does-one-tree-produce
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
x27;s the way to go and thank you for this.
Do not hesitate to ping here or privately if there is any legal
concern that comes up.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
");
> module_param(margin, uint, 0);
> MODULE_PARM_DESC(margin, "Watchdog margin in seconds (default 60s)");
>
> -MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> MODULE_ALIAS("platform:coh901327-watchdog");
Thank you!
Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
mment in .c this line should use C++ style as the first line:
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
Please check the docs for this (I know this can feel surprising but
this has been debated at great length on list)
Thank you!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
ds to be on the first line
though! [1] and eventually some special comments style.
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
C: Thomas Gleixner
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
do the same for all
HPE-copyrighted files, tree-wide ;) and/or spread the word inside your
team.
Thank you for your kind consideration!
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
metic, but since there is only a single line of
copyright statement and no other comments, it would make sense to use
C++ style // for that line too IMHO (and other similar cases)
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
Joe,
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> Add a simple atomic replace / cumulative livepatch example.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Lawrence
> ---
> samples/livepatch/Makefile | 1 +
> samples/livepatch/livepatch-cumulative.c | 216
> +++
>
what Linus prefers.
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
h
> @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2018, NVIDIA CORPORATION. All rights reserved.
> + *
> + * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> + */
Same as above
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/reset/tegra194-reset.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,155 @@
> +/*
> + * C
atch your SPDX tag.
Per module.h, GPL would mean GPL-2.0+ not GPL-2.0
It would be best if you can sync the two.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
+1,11 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
Same comment as above.
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
ine but long
legalese here and in the whole patch set? Unless you are a legalese
lover of course!
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
nder the GPL v2)
Do you mind using an SPDX id per [1] rather that this?
Steven, are you OK with this? Can you ack?
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
awesome if you could adopt SPDX ids here and in all HPE
existing and future contributions [1] rather than this fine legalese.
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
nd using SPDX tags per [1] rather that this fine but long legalese?
Unless you are a legalese lover of course.
You will also get bonus karma points if you can spread the word within
your group!
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
ICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> + * GNU General Public License for more details.
> + */
Do you mind using SPDX tags per [1] rather that this fine but long
legalese. (Here and in the whole patch series)
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 9:18 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 20:37 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Hi Philippe,
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Philippe Ombredanne
>> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 8:39 PM, Miguel Ojeda
&
e.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,1352 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
This does not match your license above. Per module.h "GPL" would mean "GPL-2.0+"
Can you use one or the other an\d ensure both of these are in sync?
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
t; +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
This does not match your license above. Per module.h "GPL v2" means
GPL-2.0 where you license above GPL-2.0+ means or later
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
h has the doc on the
meaning of MODULE_LICENSE macros.
Here you have stated a combo of GPL-2.0 and GPL-2.0 or later
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
I know this may sound weird but in .c files this should be instead:
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
See Documentation/process/license-rules.rst for why.
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
there too and elsewhere? You are using them
alright in many other places in this patch. See
Documentation/process/license-rules.rst for details
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
quot;);
Your MODULE_LICENSE does not match your SPDX license id.
MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2"); means SPDX GPL-2.0
MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); means SPDX GPL-2.0+
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
check the doc for the (fairly new) way to remove legalese
boilerplate at Documentation/process/license-rules.rst or [1]
It helps keep the focus on the code and less on licensing!
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
make sure your MODULE_LICENSE matches
the license.
Here for instance it is not clear to me if this a GPL-2.0 or a GPL-2.0+
Thanks!
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
+1 650 799 0949
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:37 PM, Himanshu Jha
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 03:10:56PM +0100, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Himanshu Jha
>> wrote:
>> > Move the adis16201 driver out of staging directory and merge to the
>
with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
> + */
Would you consider using the SPDX tags [1] instead of this legalese?
Thanks!
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
h
> index e42f96900318..f85906533cdd 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> @@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1 */
> +
> /*
> * Common eBPF ELF object loading operations.
> *
> --
> 2.15.1
>
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
.c
> @@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
And this is the correct comment style for .h files.
Thanks!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
IN
> + * CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
> + * SOFTWARE.
> + */
Do you mind using a simpler SPDX identifier instead of this long
legalese boilerplate?
This is documented in Thomas doc patches. This applies to your entire
patch set of course.
Thanks!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + */
Do you mind using a simpler SPDX identifier instead of this long
legalese boilerplate?
This is documented in Thomas doc patches. This applies to your entire
patch set of course.
Thanks!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
d using a simpler one-line SPDX identifier instead of this
fine but clearly crapouillish legalese boilerplate? Unless you are
trying to turn the kernel in a legal compendium, of course ;)
This is documented in Thomas doc patches. This would apply to your
entire patch set.
Thank you for your
SPDX identifier instead of this longer
legalese boilerplate? This is documented in Thomas doc patches.
If you could also spread the word in your team that would be much welcomed.
Thanks!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
nd editing and Jonas for the
> suggestions concerning the meta tags in the licenses files.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
> Reviewed-by: Jonas Oberg
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Corbet
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne
> Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart
> Reviewed-by: Greg K
Nm+9HDoEn9RbFjH=5j9i1c2ggmug2g...@mail.gmail.com
>
> Add the required tags for reference and tooling.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne
> Reviewed-by: Jonas Oberg
> Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong
>
&
w year: 2018 is going to be The Year of The
Penguin [1] in my personal revised version of the Chinese calendar.
"Intelligent, curious, and social, those born under the sign of the
Penguin love nothing more than coming up with creative solutions to
any kind of problem. This is the sign o
* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + */
Would you mind using a concise SPDX tag instead, as documented by
Thomas doc patches?
Thank you for your kind consideration!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
lace and are ugly warts. It could very well
be that these are not really GPL-compliant notices FWIW: keeping
notices and copyrights is quite different from a restriction of
altering things by moving them around which is exactly what is
happening with the SPDX-ification here.
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/staging/lustre/include/linux/libcfs/libcfs.h?h=v4.15-rc5#n5
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
+#define IMX_SIP_SMC_VAL(func) ARM_SMCCC_CALL_VAL(ARM_SMCCC_FAST_CALL, \
> +ARM_SMCCC_SMC_32, \
> +ARM_SMCCC_OWNER_SIP, \
> +(func))
> +
> +#define IMX_L2C310 0x1
> +
> +#define IMX_SIP_SMC_L2C310 IMX_SIP_SMC_VAL(IMX_L2C310)
> +
> +#endif
> --
> 2.14.1
>
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
General Public License as published by the
> - * Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your
> - * option) any later version.
> */
Did you CC the original authors? You would need their signoff or at
least an ack IMHO
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
// SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1
> +// NETLINK Netlink attributes
> +// Copyright (c) 2003-2013 Thomas Graf
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
1 - 100 of 293 matches
Mail list logo
