Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [alsa-devel] [RFC PATCH 8/9] soundwire: intel: remove platform devices and provide new interface | From | Pierre-Louis Bossart <> | Date | Wed, 18 Sep 2019 10:14:51 -0500 |
| |
On 9/18/19 8:54 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 03:53:02PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 08:48:33AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: >>> On 9/18/19 7:06 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:29:52AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: >>>>> On 9/17/19 12:55 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 04:23:41PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: >>>>>>> +/** >>>>>>> + * sdw_intel_probe() - SoundWire Intel probe routine >>>>>>> + * @parent_handle: ACPI parent handle >>>>>>> + * @res: resource data >>>>>>> + * >>>>>>> + * This creates SoundWire Master and Slave devices below the controller. >>>>>>> + * All the information necessary is stored in the context, and the res >>>>>>> + * argument pointer can be freed after this step. >>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>> +struct sdw_intel_ctx >>>>>>> +*sdw_intel_probe(struct sdw_intel_res *res) >>>>>>> +{ >>>>>>> + return sdw_intel_probe_controller(res); >>>>>>> +} >>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(sdw_intel_probe); >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +/** >>>>>>> + * sdw_intel_startup() - SoundWire Intel startup >>>>>>> + * @ctx: SoundWire context allocated in the probe >>>>>>> + * >>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>> +int sdw_intel_startup(struct sdw_intel_ctx *ctx) >>>>>>> +{ >>>>>>> + return sdw_intel_startup_controller(ctx); >>>>>>> +} >>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(sdw_intel_startup); >>>>>> >>>>>> Why are you exporting these functions if no one calls them? >>>>> >>>>> They are used in the next series, see '[RFC PATCH 04/12] ASoC: SOF: Intel: >>>>> add SoundWire configuration interface' >>>> >>>> That wasn't obvious :) >>>> >>>> Also, why not EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()? :) >>> >>> Since the beginning of this SoundWire work, the intent what that the code >>> could be reused in non-GPL open-source circles, hence the dual license and >>> EXPORT_SYMBOL. >> >> Hah, you _have_ talked to your lawyers about this, right? >> >> You have a chance to do something like this for header files, for .c >> files, good luck. That's going to be a hard road to go down. Many have >> tried in the past, all but 1 have failed. > > Also note, the last I checked, the _default_ license for Linux kernel > code from Intel was GPLv2. If you got an exception for this, please > work with your legal council on how to do this "properly" as that was > part of getting that exception, right? > > If you didn't get the exception, um, you have some people to go talk to, > and how come I am the one asking you about this? :(
All the legal due-diligence was done when SoundWire was initially contributed in 2018. You asked that question at the time and I will point you to the email exchange Alan Cox and you had on this topic [1].
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10015813/
| |