* GPL-1.0-licensed code for files drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986* included with commit ec97d23c8e22 ("clk: mediatek: add mt7986 clock support")
@ 2022-01-10 9:56 Lukas Bulwahn
2022-01-10 12:12 ` Sam Shih
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Lukas Bulwahn @ 2022-01-10 9:56 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Sam Shih, Ryder Lee, Stephen Boyd
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Thomas Gleixner, linux-spdx, kernel-janitors,
Linux Kernel Mailing List
Dear Sam,
Thanks for contributing the mt7986 clock support to the kernel
repository with commit ec97d23c8e22 ("clk: mediatek: add mt7986 clock
support").
You have marked the files below with the GPL-1.0 License, which
./scripts/spdxcheck.py identifies and warns about:
drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986-apmixed.c: 1:28 Invalid License ID: GPL-1.0
drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986-infracfg.c: 1:28 Invalid License ID: GPL-1.0
drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986-topckgen.c: 1:28 Invalid License ID: GPL-1.0
The kernel's licensing rules are described here:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/license-rules.html#kernel-licensing
The GPL-1.0 is a deprecated license in the kernel repository.
Driver code that is licensed with GPL-1.0 might not be compatible with
GPL-2.0. I am not a lawyer, and we probably do not want to require all
users of your driver code to needlessly involve a lawyer to get such a
statement on license compatibility.
Do you really intend to license this code under GPL-1.0 and are you
aware of all the consequences for other developers and users? Or is
this a mistake and you intend to license it under the kernel's
standard GPL-2.0 license?
Best regards,
Lukas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: GPL-1.0-licensed code for files drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986* included with commit ec97d23c8e22 ("clk: mediatek: add mt7986 clock support")
2022-01-10 9:56 GPL-1.0-licensed code for files drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986* included with commit ec97d23c8e22 ("clk: mediatek: add mt7986 clock support") Lukas Bulwahn
@ 2022-01-10 12:12 ` Sam Shih
2022-01-14 1:43 ` Stephen Boyd
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Sam Shih @ 2022-01-10 12:12 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Lukas Bulwahn, Ryder Lee, Stephen Boyd
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Thomas Gleixner, linux-spdx, kernel-janitors,
Linux Kernel Mailing List
Hi Luka/Stephen,
This is my mistake, I seem to use an old license header on it.
Just like "clk-mt7986-eth.c" in the same patch series,
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211217121148.6753-4-sam.shih@mediatek.com/
I intend to license "clk-mt7986-apmixed.c", "clk-mt7986-infracfg.c",
and "clk-mt7986-topckgen" under the kernel's standard GPL-2.0.
Should I need to resend this patch?
Or I can just send a follow-up patch to fix it?
Regards,
Sam
On Mon, 2022-01-10 at 10:56 +0100, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> Dear Sam,
>
>
> Thanks for contributing the mt7986 clock support to the kernel
> repository with commit ec97d23c8e22 ("clk: mediatek: add mt7986 clock
> support").
>
> You have marked the files below with the GPL-1.0 License, which
> ./scripts/spdxcheck.py identifies and warns about:
>
> drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986-apmixed.c: 1:28 Invalid License ID:
> GPL-1.0
> drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986-infracfg.c: 1:28 Invalid License ID:
> GPL-1.0
> drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986-topckgen.c: 1:28 Invalid License ID:
> GPL-1.0
>
> The kernel's licensing rules are described here:
>
>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/license-rules.html*kernel-licensing__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3vjYIYa2VqgzRgsUxjx-mwtOtidbamcTDphKaMUo-7ql0YlaB4Qi_Xc-1vDpFfju$
>
>
> The GPL-1.0 is a deprecated license in the kernel repository.
>
> Driver code that is licensed with GPL-1.0 might not be compatible
> with
> GPL-2.0. I am not a lawyer, and we probably do not want to require
> all
> users of your driver code to needlessly involve a lawyer to get such
> a
> statement on license compatibility.
>
> Do you really intend to license this code under GPL-1.0 and are you
> aware of all the consequences for other developers and users? Or is
> this a mistake and you intend to license it under the kernel's
> standard GPL-2.0 license?
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Lukas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: GPL-1.0-licensed code for files drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986* included with commit ec97d23c8e22 ("clk: mediatek: add mt7986 clock support")
2022-01-10 12:12 ` Sam Shih
@ 2022-01-14 1:43 ` Stephen Boyd
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Boyd @ 2022-01-14 1:43 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Lukas Bulwahn, Ryder Lee, Sam Shih
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Thomas Gleixner, linux-spdx, kernel-janitors,
Linux Kernel Mailing List
Quoting Sam Shih (2022-01-10 04:12:57)
> Hi Luka/Stephen,
>
> This is my mistake, I seem to use an old license header on it.
> Just like "clk-mt7986-eth.c" in the same patch series,
>
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211217121148.6753-4-sam.shih@mediatek.com/
>
> I intend to license "clk-mt7986-apmixed.c", "clk-mt7986-infracfg.c",
> and "clk-mt7986-topckgen" under the kernel's standard GPL-2.0.
>
> Should I need to resend this patch?
> Or I can just send a follow-up patch to fix it?
>
Please send a followup to fix it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-01-14 1:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-01-10 9:56 GPL-1.0-licensed code for files drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986* included with commit ec97d23c8e22 ("clk: mediatek: add mt7986 clock support") Lukas Bulwahn
2022-01-10 12:12 ` Sam Shih
2022-01-14 1:43 ` Stephen Boyd
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).