Re: [PATCH V6 1/3] dt-bindings: clock: document Amlogic S4 SoC PLL & peripheral clock controller

[Yu Tu]

Hi Kevin,

On 2023/1/19 8:38, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> [ EXTERNAL EMAIL ]
>
> Yu Tu <yu.tu@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On 2023/1/16 16:29, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..bbec5094d5c3
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@
> > > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) */
> > >
> > > Unusual license... are you sure to license the bindings under GPLv4 or
> > > GPLv5? Fine by me.
> >
> > Yes.
>
> The rest of the bindings for Amlogic SoCs are GPL-2.0 (without the '+').
> Adding the dual-license for MIT seems fine, but adding the '+' is
> curious.
>
> It would be helpful if you could please explain why you'd like these
> bindings to be licensed differently than the rest of the SoC family.

I actually refer to the previous g12a Soc.
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2-rc4/source/include/dt-bindings/clock/g12a-clkc.h
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2-rc4/source/include/dt-bindings/clock/axg-clkc.h
[...]

So if you think it is not necessary, I will delete the '+' as you 
suggested. Don't know what you choose?

> Kevin