lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jul]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: gpio: Add a header file for Amlogic C3 SoCs
From
On 2023/7/12 13:56, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>
> On 11/07/2023 20:05, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/gpio/amlogic-c3-gpio.h
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
>>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR MIT) */
>>>> Any reason to deviate from the usual license terms for bindings, which is
>>>> "GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause"?
>>>
>>> I initially used the license commonly used by Amlogic (reference: meson-s4-gpio.h):
>>> ```
>>> /* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) */
>>> ```
>>>
>>> But when I checked the patch, some warnings appeared:
>>> ```
>>> WARNING: DT binding headers should be licensed (GPL-2.0-only OR .*)
>>> #37: FILE: include/dt-bindings/gpio/amlogic-c3-gpio.h:1:
>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) */
>>> ```
>>> So I followed the prompts and changed the license.
>>>
>>> Can I ignore this warning and use the (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) license?
>>
>> If the tools are happy then I suppose you are okay.. I'll leave that to
>> Rob or Krzysztof, but if you have a reason for diverging that seems fine
>> to me.
>
> It is very weird that company wants GPLv3 and even weirder that it
> agrees for GPLv4 and GPLv5 (GPLv5 might force Amlogic to do some
> interesting things...). I am pretty sure company lawyers don't want it
> and just do not understand licenses or someone forgot to actually check
> it. Anyway, it's fine for Linux kernel, if you really need it.
>

That's true.
We will follow the checkpatch suggestion.
Thanks!

> However the argument was "meson-s4-gpio.h" has it, which is not really
> correct argument or accurate. Is it derivative work that you need the
> same license? If not, why presence of something causes you to do the
> same without thinking?
>
> If Amlogic requires GPLv3 or GPL4 or GPLv2000, please confirm it here
> with your official email. Otherwise, if it is not a derivative work
> confirm that. Otherwise just go with what checkpatch asks you.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-amlogic mailing list
> linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-amlogic

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-07-16 20:48    [W:0.112 / U:0.232 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site