netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next ] net: mscc: Add SPDX identifier

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 17 May 2018 18:13:25 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Allan Nielsen <Allan.Nielsen@...rosemi.com>,
        razvan.stefanescu@....com, po.liu@....com,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next ] net: mscc: Add SPDX identifier

On Thu, 2018-05-17 at 21:39 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 17/05/2018 12:28:59-0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-05-17 at 21:23 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > > ocelot_qsys.h is missing the SPDX identfier, fix that.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
> > 
> > Only the copyright holders should ideally be modifying
> > these and also removing other license content.
> > 
> > For instance, what's the real intent here?
> > 
> 
> Well, if you have a look, I submitted that file this cycle and it is the
> only one that doesn't have the proper SPDX identifier. This is a mistake
> I'm fixing.

Just because you submitted it does not mean you
are the copyright holder.

> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_qsys.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_qsys.h
> > 
> > []
> > > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR MIT) */
> > 
> > GPL 2.0+ or 2.0?
> > 
> 
> 2.0

How do you know that?