Messages in this thread | | | From | Peter Hüwe <> | Subject | Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH 1/1] TPM: STMicroelectronics ST33 I2C KERNEL 3.x.x | Date | Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:39:02 +0100 |
| |
Hi Kent,
Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2012, 22:00:48 schrieb Kent Yoder: > This is already at least v3 of the driver IIRC. And its not fully > committed at all, its just in a staging tree. I can blow it away at any > time if we find problems. > > Not a problem. usually I'd attach any updates I planned to commit for > public review, then if anything wasn't made public before I issue my > pull request to send them to security-next, I'd append the full diff to > the pull request at that time. Either way, all changes will hit a list > at some point in time. Ok - great ;) maybe my I got the 'planning on pushing' wrong.
> > I thought the Mathias has changed the naming of the files? I don't see > > that in your commit. > > Good catch, this is the kind of review I was asking for. :-)
Hehe. Glad to hear. You know I care for the tpm subsystem ;)
> > > The version you committed to that branch still has some of the items of > > my first review. (e.g. > > > > * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify > > > > * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by > > * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or > > * (at your option) any later version.) > > > > -> The (possible) GPL v3 clause has to go away for the kernel, but I'm > > not a lawyer. > > A GPLv3 clause would say "v3 or any later version". This should be > fine.
Hmm, okay. I just googled for it on lkml, there are some files and drivers. So I guess it's okay - sorry for the noise. But I'm not a lawyer, personally I'd go for GPLv2 only but that's my personal opinion.
Thanks, Peter
| |