Re: [PATCH] clk: rockchip: Switch dt-binding headers for rk3328 to GPL/X11

[Emmanuel Vadot]

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 17:19:58 +0100
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Dear Emmanuel,
> 
> On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Emmanuel Vadot <manu@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Since those files are also needed kernel side, switch their licences
> > to GPL/X11 so it can be used in BSD kernels.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Emmanuel Vadot <manu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  include/dt-bindings/clock/rk3328-cru.h   | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> >  include/dt-bindings/power/rk3328-power.h |  2 +-
> >  2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/rk3328-cru.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/rk3328-cru.h
> > index d2b26a4b43eb..bbcf03641f89 100644
> > --- a/include/dt-bindings/clock/rk3328-cru.h
> > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/rk3328-cru.h
> > @@ -2,15 +2,43 @@
> >   * Copyright (c) 2016 Rockchip Electronics Co. Ltd.
> >   * Author: Elaine <zhangqing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >   *
> > - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > - * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> > - * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> > - * (at your option) any later version.
> > + * This file is dual-licensed: you can use it either under the terms
> > + * of the GPL or the X11 license, at your option. Note that this dual
> > + * licensing only applies to this file, and not this project as a
> > + * whole.
> >   *
> > - * 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.
> > + *  a) This file is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> > + *     modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
> > + *     published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the
> > + *     License, or (at your option) any later version.
> > + *
> > + *     This file 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.
> > + *
> > + * Or, alternatively,
> > + *
> > + *  b) Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
> > + *     obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation
> > + *     files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without
> > + *     restriction, including without limitation the rights to use,
> > + *     copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or
> > + *     sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
> > + *     Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following
> > + *     conditions:
> > + *
> > + *     The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
> > + *     included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
> > + *
> > + *     THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
> > + *     EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES
> > + *     OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND
> > + *     NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT
> > + *     HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY,
> > + *     WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
> > + *     FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
> > + *     OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
> >   */
> 
> You just poked a big pointy stick in my left eye. It hurts! Why not
> use a proper SPDX tag here, like you did below?

 I've just used the same licence present on the DTS file.
 In one file there was just SPDX licence tags so I've keep it this way.

> Each time such a long legalese is added to the kernel instead of an
> SPDX tag there is an endangered animal species that disappears from
> the face of the earth for good.  You do not want to bear this grave
> responsibility, do you?
> 
> Also are you sure Elaine, other contributors and Rockchip Electronics
> Co. Ltd. agree to this change?
> It might be best if the patch were to come from them directly or at
> least you will need proper acks for sure.

 I don't know if they agree, sending a patch seems the best way to know
for me.

> >
> >  #ifndef _DT_BINDINGS_CLK_ROCKCHIP_RK3328_H
> > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rk3328-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rk3328-power.h
> > index 02e3d7fc1cce..301f30967b39 100644
> > --- a/include/dt-bindings/power/rk3328-power.h
> > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rk3328-power.h
> > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> > -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 or X11 */
> >  #ifndef __DT_BINDINGS_POWER_RK3328_POWER_H__
> >  #define __DT_BINDINGS_POWER_RK3328_POWER_H__
> 
> What you call X11 is called MIT in SPDX and in Thomas doc patches [1],
> e.g. this tag is supposed to match the eyes-poking long legalese
> above, this should be instead:
> 
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ or MIT) */

 Right, sorry for that, I'll change that.

> Finally if the goal of this proposed license update is usage in
> FreeBSD and other BSD kernels, why use MIT as a second license? Would
> not a BSD be better and avoid license inflation on the BSD side?

 It will probably be better, I honestly don't care. A lot of dts file
and dt headers are already GPL+X11 so I'm just following the common way
of doing things.

> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/4/934
> -- 
> Cordially
> Philippe Ombredanne


-- 
Emmanuel Vadot <manu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <manu@xxxxxxxxxxx>