Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 28 Jan 2023 16:19:38 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH V6 1/3] dt-bindings: clock: document Amlogic S4 SoC PLL & peripheral clock controller | From | Yu Tu <> |
| |
On 2023/1/25 8:25, Kevin Hilman wrote: > [ EXTERNAL EMAIL ] > > Yu Tu <yu.tu@amlogic.com> writes: > >> Hi Kevin, >> >> On 2023/1/19 8:38, Kevin Hilman wrote: >>> [ EXTERNAL EMAIL ] >>> >>> Yu Tu <yu.tu@amlogic.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 2023/1/16 16:29, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h >>>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>>> index 000000000000..bbec5094d5c3 >>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h >>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@ >>>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) */ >>>>> >>>>> Unusual license... are you sure to license the bindings under GPLv4 or >>>>> GPLv5? Fine by me. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes. >>> >>> The rest of the bindings for Amlogic SoCs are GPL-2.0 (without the '+'). >>> Adding the dual-license for MIT seems fine, but adding the '+' is >>> curious. >>> >>> It would be helpful if you could please explain why you'd like these >>> bindings to be licensed differently than the rest of the SoC family. >>> >> >> I actually refer to the previous g12a Soc. >> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2-rc4/source/include/dt-bindings/clock/g12a-clkc.h >> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2-rc4/source/include/dt-bindings/clock/axg-clkc.h >> [...] >> >> So if you think it is not necessary, I will delete the '+' as you >> suggested. Don't know what you choose? > > Drop the `+`
Okay.
> > Kevin >
|  |