linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: BCM5301X: Add DT for Luxul XAP-1510

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <CACna6ryWGsOwBhhauJTROi2BPbmgGn_4oYnKc-L8-3Joy+5M7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 5 May 2016 00:36:24 +0200
From:	Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
To:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:	Dan Haab <dhaab@...ul.com>,
	"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"moderated list:ARM PORT" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: BCM5301X: Add DT for Luxul XAP-1510

On 4 May 2016 at 20:53, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote:
> On 03/05/16 10:28, Dan Haab wrote:
>> Luxul XAP-1510 is an AP device based on BCM4708 SoC. It uses flash
>> memory connected to the SPI controller.
>
> Looks fine, except one nit:
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-luxul-xap-1510.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-luxul-xap-1510.dts
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..f4460b5
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-luxul-xap-1510.dts
>> @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
>> +/*
>> + * Broadcom BCM470X / BCM5301X ARM platform code.
>> + * DTS for Luxul XAP-1510
>> + *
>> + * Copyright 2015 Luxul Inc.
>> + *
>> + * Licensed under the GNU/GPL. See COPYING for details.
>
> The ARM SoC maintainer have been asking to utilize a license which is
> also BSD compatible, so something along the lines of this one:
>
> arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm911360k.dts
>
> Do you mind respining the patch to include that kind of license header?

I wasn't aware of this neither. Shall we re-license existing DTS files
as well? I'm fine with changing them to BSD compatible.

I'm a bit confused by using BSD license only. Kernel is licensed under
GNU GPL version 2 and if there are some BSD compatible modules, they
use dual licensing model (BSD/GPL). Shouldn't we use BSD/GPL in DTS
files as well then?

-- 
Rafał