On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 07:26:00PM +0000, Leo Li wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pankaj Bansal > > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 11:06 PM > > To: Leo Li <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Tom Rini > > <[email protected]>; Priyanka Jain <[email protected]>; Varun Sethi > > <[email protected]>; Mingkai Hu <[email protected]> > > Subject: RE: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM: dts: Freescale: re-license device tree > > files under X11 > > > > ++ Leo > > > > Hi Leo. Can you please reply to this question ? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Tom Rini [mailto:[email protected]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 8:59 AM > > > To: Pankaj Bansal <[email protected]> > > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Priyanka Jain > > > <[email protected]>; Varun Sethi <[email protected]>; Mingkai Hu > > > <[email protected]> > > > Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM: dts: Freescale: re-license device > > > tree files under X11 > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 03:27:09AM +0000, Pankaj Bansal wrote: > > > > HI, > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Tom Rini [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 8:32 AM > > > > > To: Pankaj Bansal <[email protected]> > > > > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Priyanka Jain > > > > > <[email protected]>; Varun Sethi <[email protected]>; Mingkai > > Hu > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM: dts: Freescale: re-license > > > > > device tree files under X11 > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 08:03:54AM +0530, Pankaj Bansal wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The current GPL only licensing on the device trees makes it very > > > > > > impractical for other software components licensed under another > > > > > > license. > > > > > > > > > > > > To make it easier to reuse them, re-license the the device trees > > > > > > for Freescale (now NXP) SoCs and boards under license X11. > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Priyanka Jain <[email protected]> > > > > > > Cc: Mingkai Hu <[email protected]> > > > > > > Cc: York Sun <[email protected]> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Bansal <[email protected]> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1012a-frdm.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1012a-frdm.dtsi | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1012a-qds.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1012a-qds.dtsi | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1012a-rdb.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1012a-rdb.dtsi | 4 +--- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1012a.dtsi | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1043a-qds-duart.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1043a-qds-lpuart.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1043a-qds.dtsi | 4 +--- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1043a-rdb.dts | 4 +--- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1043a.dtsi | 4 +--- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1046a-qds-duart.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1046a-qds-lpuart.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1046a-qds.dtsi | 4 +--- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1046a-rdb.dts | 4 +--- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1046a.dtsi | 4 +--- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1088a-qds.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1088a-rdb.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1088a.dtsi | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls2080a-qds.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls2080a-rdb.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls2080a.dtsi | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls2081a-rdb.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls2088a-rdb-qspi.dts | 2 +- > > > > > > 25 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > How do these changes match up to the kernel? Thanks! > > > > > > > > The kernel dts files are GPLv2 and X11 dual licensed. E.g. > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable. > > > > gi t/tree/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a.dtsi > > > > > > > > To avoid dual licensing, we used X11 only. See > > > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#X11License > > > > > > Why would we not want to match the kernel here? > > As we are working with Qualcomm for the potential acquisition, their > legal team mentioned that they are against using dual license. So as > we are updating the license we would like to take that concern too.
I want these to be kept in-sync with what is in the Linux kernel. So, whatever you get done there is fine here (and follow the usual rules in the commit message when syncing), thanks! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
