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

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

Date:	Thu, 5 May 2016 23:47:23 +0200
From:	Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>
To:	Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
	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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: BCM5301X: Add DT for Luxul XAP-1510

On 05/05/2016 12:36 AM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> 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?
> 

As far as I understand the License part you can take code which is
licensed under BSD license and use it in GPL code because you can comply
with the BSD license and also handle it in a way to be GPL compliant at
the same time. You can also make a change to BSD code and license this
change under the GPL, then the complete code (the old one + your change)
is now GPL.

Are the device tree files licensed under BSD license to make it easier
to integrate them into a proprietary boot loader or what is the purpose?

Hauke