On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 09:48:45AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > On 7/5/22 5:47 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, 29 Jun 2022 at 10:58, <teik.heng.ch...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > From: Teik Heng Chong <teik.heng.ch...@intel.com> > > > > > > All the source code of clk-mem-n5x.c and clk-n5x.c are from Intel, > > > update the license to use both GPL2.0 and BSD-3 Clause because this > > > copy of code may used for open source and internal project. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Teik Heng Chong <teik.heng.ch...@intel.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.c | 4 ++-- > > > drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.h | 4 ++-- > > > drivers/clk/altera/clk-n5x.c | 4 ++-- > > > drivers/clk/altera/clk-n5x.h | 4 ++-- > > > 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.c > > > b/drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.c > > > index ca44998641..9bbe2cd0ca 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.c > > > +++ b/drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.c > > > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > > > -// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause > > > > +Tom Rini > > > > OR is not a license so I think you should drop that word. > > OR is valid in SPDX license identifier expressions > > https://spdx.dev/spdx-specification-21-web-version/#h.jxpfx0ykyb60 > > > Also U-Boot is GPL so seems strange to use a different license for > > these files. If it was wrong initially, perhaps add a 'Fixes' tag? > > As used in U-Boot, this effectively is an AND (since this code will be > linked with GPL code). As stated in the commit message, presumably this > is to allow use in other (BSD-licensed) projects. Tom, do we generally > allow this sort of thing? Is it OK for someone to come along later and > change the license back (e.g. make it GPL-only again)? > > I *would* like to see a RB or AB from Siew Chin Lim, since he is the > original author of this code, but since it is copyright Intel I suppose > it is fine to leave him out...
Note this already is in master. As it's all Intel commits, I figured that was good enough for being able to do this kind of change. As to dual licensing of C code, I'm not in favor of this, overall, no. I understand why device trees do it. And most of the other in-tree examples here are places we import other code from and for good reason (I'm thinking the Android related headers). In this specific example, I'm going to assume that the rigorous legal review I know Intel does in some cases would be done here as I'm not sure how exactly drivers/clk/altera/clk-n5x.c could be used as-is somewhere else, but I also see how about 90% of it could be shared with some other project and not reference U-Boot specifics. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
