Re: [PATCH 02/14] soundwire: Add SoundWire bus type

[Vinod Koul]

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 06:27:23PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 09:50:42PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 06:03:24PM +0200, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 08:33:18AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > >> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/bus_type.c b/drivers/soundwire/bus_type.c
> > > >> new file mode 100644
> > > >> index 000000000000..a14d1de80afa
> > > >> --- /dev/null
> > > >> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/bus_type.c
> > > >> @@ -0,0 +1,229 @@
> > > >> +/*
> > > >> + *  This file is provided under a dual BSD/GPLv2 license.  When using or
> > > >> + *  redistributing this file, you may do so under either license.
> > > >> + *
> > > >> + *  GPL LICENSE SUMMARY
> > > >> + *
> > > >> + *  Copyright(c) 2015-17 Intel Corporation.
> > > >> + *
> > > >> + *  This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > > >> + *  it under the terms of version 2 of the GNU General Public License as
> > > >> + *  published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > > >> + *
> > > >> + *  This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> > > >> + *  WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> > > >> + *  MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
> > > >> + *  General Public License for more details.
> > > >> + *
> > > >> + *  BSD LICENSE
> > > >> + *
> > > >> + *  Copyright(c) 2015-17 Intel Corporation.
> > > >> + *
> > > >> + *  Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
> > > >> + *  modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
> > > >> + *  are met:
> > > >> + *
> > > >> + *    * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
> > > >> + *      notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
> > > >> + *    * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
> > > >> + *      notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in
> > > >> + *      the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
> > > >> + *      distribution.
> > > >> + *    * Neither the name of Intel Corporation nor the names of its
> > > >> + *      contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived
> > > >> + *      from this software without specific prior written permission.
> > > >> + *
> > > >> + *  THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
> > > >> + *  "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
> > > >> + *  LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR
> > > >> + *  A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
> > > >> + *  OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
> > > >> + *  SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
> > > >> + *  LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
> > > >> + *  DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
> > > >> + *  THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
> > > >> + *  (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
> > > >> + *  OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
> > > >
> > > > Are you _sure_ that code that interacts with the driver core can have a
> > > > dual-license here?  Have you explained to lawyers what you are doing
> > > > here (wrapping gpl-only symbols with non-gpl-only exports)?
> > > >
> > > > And why dual license something that will only ever work on Linux?
> > > >
> > > > And finally, put a real SPDX header up there so that people don't have
> > > > to parse that horrid amount of text to try to determine exactly what
> > > > that license is.
> > > 
> > > Vinod:
> > > 
> > > It is hard to parse for people ... but it is quite hard for tools to catch
> > > this too. This license notice is so peculiar and special that I had to
> > > make a special detection rule just for it [1] in my tool :|
> > > Please have mercy: could you not pick something simpler?
> > 
> > Sorry for the trouble it caused. The code is Dual license as indicated by
> > first two lines. I didn't invent the text here, legal folks did and used
> > the standard template available in my company
> > 
> > I quick grep on Dual license users looks like we already have this in kernel
> > code. See drivers/ntb/hw/intel/ntb_hw_intel.c
> 
> Just because someone did something wrong in the past, doesn't mean they
> should keep doing more wrong things in the future :)

Sure, I agree w/ you that. But this is still a standard header to use for
me. I will check with folks to see if we can use as you suggested.

-- 
~Vinod