> -----Original Message----- > From: Piotr Masłowski <[email protected]> > On Tue Feb 17, 2026 at 5:26 PM CET, Richard Fontana wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 11:00 AM Piotr Masłowski <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > >> [...] > >> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > >> > >> Is there some intended meaning behind this distinction? Bear in mind > >> I'm not a kernel developer so I might very well be missing something, > >> but AFAIK the `GPL-2.0` SPDX identifier is just an older, deprecated > >> variant with the same meaning as `GPL-2.0-only`. (Just like `GPL-2.0+` > >> which is a deprecated version of `GPL-2.0-or-later`.) > > > > Several years ago the FSF persuaded the SPDX legal team to deprecate > > GPL-2.0/GPL-2.0+ in favor of GPL-2.0-only/GPL-2.0-or-later. The FSF > > viewpoint is expressed here: > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/identify-licenses-clearly.html > > > > Personally, I think this change was problematic. > > Sure, but I don't think there's any reason to mix both styles, is there?
No. This was a mistake on my part (or at least a violation of my own "guidelines" for applying SPDX IDs to files). The two IDs 'GPL-2.0' and 'GPL-2.0-only' are semantically and legally equivalent. As Richard noted, the SPDX legal team deprecated GPL-2.0, which I don't agree with. The kernel documentation recommends GPL-2.0 instead of GPL-2.0-only. See https://docs.kernel.org/process/license-rules.html So my general guideline to myself is to use GPL-2.0 when there's no established pattern in a directory. However, when there is already code with an SPDX ID in a directory or from an author, I use whichever one has already been assigned (if it's clear). This is to keep consistency and honors previous decisions about which of the equivalent IDs to use. sound/soc/apple/mca.c already had a GPL-2.0-only ID, and I should have used that for both the Kconfig and the Makefile, by that guideline. However, there is also consistency by file type. There are a few more uses of GPL-2.0 than GPL-2.0-only in Makefiles throughout the kernel. But in this case I think that the directory/author consistency should take precedence over the file type consistency. So I messed up in this case. My recollection is that I did this SDPX application in two different sweeps of the directory, (that is by file type instead of all files at the same time in this dir.) The application of the SPDX ID for the Makefile was done at a different time than the application of the SPDX ID for the Kconfig. That's no excuse for this sloppiness, however. I plan to add some more steps to my patch checklist (and maybe a new tool to check for inconsistencies like this) to avoid this in the future. The Makefile should have had GPL-2.0-only, to match mca.c and Kconfig. I will submit a new V2 patch with the Makefile having a GPL-2.0-only ID. Thanks for catching this! -- Tim
