Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: use capital "OR" for multiple licenses in SPDX

[Kurt Kanzenbach]

On Wed Aug 23 2023, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 23/08/2023 12:54, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
>> On Wed Aug 23 2023, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 23/08/2023 11:32, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
>>>> On Wed Aug 23 2023, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> Documentation/process/license-rules.rst and checkpatch expect the SPDX
>>>>> identifier syntax for multiple licenses to use capital "OR".  Correct it
>>>>> to keep consistent format and avoid copy-paste issues.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> Side note: The SPDX spec in section D.2 says: "License expression
>>>> operators (AND, OR and WITH) should be matched in a case-sensitive
>>>> manner.". Should is not must. So I assume checkpatch and spdxcheck
>>>> should handle both cases. Especially because:
>>>>
>>>> |linux (git)-[master] % git grep 'SPDX' | grep ' or ' | wc -l
>>>> |370
>>>>
>>>
>>> But "should" denotes preferred rule:
>> 
>> Yes, of course :).
>> 
>> You mentioned checkpatch. But checkpatch doesn't warn about it. Or does
>> it? 
>> 
>> |linux (git)-[master] % ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -- drivers/net/dsa/hirschmann/hellcreek.h
>> |total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 321 lines checked
>> |
>> |drivers/net/dsa/hirschmann/hellcreek.h has no obvious style problems and
>> |is ready for submission.
>
> Checkpatch checks licenses of only some files

AFAICT it checks the license of all files. It calls spdxcheck on the
SPDX identifier. It has some special rules for DT bindings etc.

> so maybe I should change description here (it's you know,
> copy-paste...).

Sure.

Thanks,
Kurt

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature