Re: [PATCH v5] checkpatch: introduce proper bindings license check

[Dmitry Rokosov]

Hello Joe,

On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 09:29:36AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 2:17 PM Dmitry Rokosov <ddrokosov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > All headers from 'include/dt-bindings/' must be verified by checkpatch
> > together with Documentation bindings, because all of them are part of
> > the whole DT bindings system.
> >
> > The requirement is dual licensed and matching patterns:
> > * Schemas:
> >     /GPL-2\.0(?:-only)? OR BSD-2-Clause/
> > * Headers:
> >     /GPL-2\.0(?:-only)? OR \S+/
> >
> > Above patterns suggested by Rob at:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAL_Jsq+-YJsBO+LuPJ=ZQ=eb-monrwzuCppvReH+af7hYZzNaQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > The issue was found during patch review:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230313201259.19998-4-ddrokosov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Rokosov <ddrokosov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Changes v5 since v4 at [4]:
> >     - only capital OR is acceptable for SPDX per Rob's suggestion
> >
> > Changes v4 since v3 at [3]:
> >     - introduce separate pattern for dt-bindings headers following Rob's
> >       suggestion
> >
> > Changes v3 since v2 at [2]:
> >     - replace 'not =~' expression with '!~' to be aligned with other
> >       checkpatch lines
> >
> > Changes v2 since v1 at [1]:
> >     - include/dt-bindings check is aligned to open parens
> >     - introduce more strict pattern for bindings license:
> >       /GPL-2\.0(?:-only|-or-later|\+)? (?:OR|or) BSD-2-Clause/
> >
> > Links:
> >     [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230317201621.15518-1-ddrokosov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >     [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230320100027.27788-1-ddrokosov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >     [3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230320203350.13696-1-ddrokosov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >     [4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230331121017.14324-1-ddrokosov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > ---
> >  scripts/checkpatch.pl | 7 ++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>

Are you okay with this patch version? Rob is good with that, so please
advise what the next step is.

-- 
Thank you,
Dmitry