Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: allwinner: Convert to new-style SPDX license identifiers

[ClÃment PÃron]

Hi Maxime,

On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 at 20:12, Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 07:12:16PM +0100, ClÃment PÃron wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 18:42, Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Clement,
> > >
> > > Sorry for the pretty slow answer
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 02:24:35PM +0100, ClÃment PÃron wrote:
> > > > Move the SPDX-License-Identifier lines to the top and drop the
> > > > license splat.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: ClÃment PÃron <peron.clem@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > This the same logic that what has be done on Amlogic.
> > > >
> > > > Commit: ARM64: dts: amlogic: Convert to new-style SPDX license identifiers
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/890455/
> > >
> > > So there's a bunch of different things that should be addressed in
> > > separate patches here I believe.
> > >
> > > >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/axp803.dtsi     | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-bananapi-m64.dts | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-nanopi-a64.dts   | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-olinuxino.dts    | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-orangepi-win.dts | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pine64-lts.dts   |  3 +-
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pine64-plus.dts  | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pine64.dts  | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pinebook.dts     |  1 -
> > > >  .../allwinner/sun50i-a64-sopine-baseboard.dts | 42 +------------------
> > > >  .../boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-sopine.dtsi | 42 +------------------
> > > >  .../boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-teres-i.dts |  3 +-
> > > >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../sun50i-h5-bananapi-m2-plus-v1.2.dts       |  4 +-
> > > >  .../allwinner/sun50i-h5-bananapi-m2-plus.dts  |  4 +-
> > > >  .../allwinner/sun50i-h5-nanopi-neo-plus2.dts  | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-h5-nanopi-neo2.dts   | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-h5-orangepi-pc2.dts  | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../allwinner/sun50i-h5-orangepi-prime.dts    | 42 +------------------
> > > >  .../sun50i-h5-orangepi-zero-plus.dts          |  3 +-
> > > >  .../sun50i-h5-orangepi-zero-plus2.dts         | 39 +----------------
> > > >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h5.dtsi  | 39 +----------------
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-beelink-gs1.dts   |  2 +-
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-orangepi-3.dts    |  2 +-
> > > >  .../allwinner/sun50i-h6-orangepi-lite2.dts    |  2 +-
> > > >  .../allwinner/sun50i-h6-orangepi-one-plus.dts |  2 +-
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-orangepi.dtsi     |  2 +-
> > > >  .../boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-pine-h64.dts |  2 +-
> > > >  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-tanix-tx6.dts     |  2 +-
> > > >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi  |  2 +-
> > > >  30 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 634 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/axp803.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/axp803.dtsi
> > > > index f0349ef4bfdd..f4f2c70fde5c 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/axp803.dtsi
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/axp803.dtsi
> > > > @@ -1,43 +1,6 @@
> > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
> > > >  /*
> > > >   * Copyright 2017 Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > - *
> > > > - * 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.
> > > > - *
> > > > - *  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.
> > > >   */
> > >
> > > So this is the first, obvious, one that you talk about in your commit
> > > log. While the license says that it's X11, SPDX reports that it's now
> > > MIT, can you clarify this?
> >
> > As far as I know X11 and MIT are similar and MIT is preferred in Linux.
> > see: LICENSES/preferred.
> > So I have converted the X11 to MIT but it can be an explicit commit.
> > This is done implicitly in the Amlogic commit.
>
> It's not really my main concern, it's more that if it's a license
> change, then you need the agreement of all the authors, so basically
> anyone that touched all those DT.
OK

>
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pine64-lts.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pine64-lts.dts
> > > > index 72d6961dc312..2ca36580436c 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pine64-lts.dts
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pine64-lts.dts
> > > > @@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
> > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
> > > >  /*
> > > > - * SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
> > > > - *
> > > >   * Copyright (c) 2018 ARM Ltd.
> > > >   */
> > >
> > > This is another kind of changes though. The SPDX identifier is there,
> > > but under the wrong format and you're fixing it.
> > >
> > > That being said, I'm not a super fan of mixing the two comment styles
> > > for two lines.
> > >
> > > What about using only // style comments for the header?
> >
> > Most of the other dts use this style for the header so I would like to
> > keep this kind of style.
> > Except if DT maintainers want explicity to move to another style.
> > Having a coherency in all dts is better and we can move to another
> > style with a simple script.
>
> Some drivers already use the // comment for their copyright notice,
> the coding style allows it for single line comment and our DTs already
> use it, so it's the cleanest solution imho.
Ok, I will go for this style.

>
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-beelink-gs1.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-beelink-gs1.dts
> > > > index f335f7482a73..84b7e9936300 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-beelink-gs1.dts
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-beelink-gs1.dts
> > > > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> > > > -// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ or MIT)
> > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
> > > >  /*
> > > >   * Copyright (C) 2019 ClÃment PÃron <peron.clem@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > >   */
> > >
> > > And I'm not sure what this one (and the next) is?
> >
> > The license expressions in dual licensed files is wrong here, "OR"
> > should be uppercase.
> > I can move it to a separate commit if you like.
>
> Ah, right, indeed, this should be in a separate patch.
So how many patch do you recommend here ?

1 for the or -> OR style fix.
1 to change to SPDX.
and 1 to use the same // style everywhere ?

Regards,
Clement

>
> Thanks!
> Maxime