On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 07:54:27PM +0200, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote: > Adopt the SPDX license identifier headers to ease license compliance > management. > > Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balle...@collabora.com> > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > drivers/pwm/pwm-cros-ec.c | 13 ++++--------- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-cros-ec.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-cros-ec.c > index 9c13694eaa24..9bf4cde86765 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-cros-ec.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-cros-ec.c > @@ -1,12 +1,7 @@ > -/* > - * Copyright (C) 2016 Google, Inc > - * > - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it > - * under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2, as published > by > - * the Free Software Foundation. > - * > - * Expose a PWM controlled by the ChromeOS EC to the host processor. > - */ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > +// Expose a PWM controlled by the ChromeOS EC to the host processor. > +// > +// Copyright (C) 2016 Google, Inc.
This is odd. I understand that for some reason there is an exception for SPDX license identifies to use C++ style comments, but why would you make the whole comment C++ style? Why not just something like the below: +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 /* * Copyright (C) 2016 Google, Inc * - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it - * under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2, as published by - * the Free Software Foundation. - * * Expose a PWM controlled by the ChromeOS EC to the host processor. */ Thierry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
