linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/21] eeprom: at24: use SPDX identifier instead of GPL boiler-plate

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]

Message-ID: <20180319153822.GB23694@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Mar 2018 16:38:22 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/21] eeprom: at24: use SPDX identifier instead of GPL
 boiler-plate

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 01:56:28PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> 2018-03-19 13:51 GMT+01:00 Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>:
> > On 2018-03-19 13:12, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> >> 2018-03-19 12:03 GMT+01:00 Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>:
> >>> Also, use a // style comment for the SPDX line in C files.
> >>
> >> I'm seeing both /* */ and // style comments used for SPDX headers - is
> >> there any reason not to use /* */ here?
> >
> > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst states:
> >
> > 2. Style:
> >
> >    The SPDX license identifier is added in form of a comment.  The comment
> >    style depends on the file type::
> >
> >       C source: // SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>
> >       C header: /* SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression> */
> >       ASM:      /* SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression> */
> >       scripts:  # SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>
> >       .rst:     .. SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>
> >       .dts{i}:  // SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>
> >
> > Read more in that file for reasons. If there are none, I personally
> > think the reason is that "Linus said so". Or something like that?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> 
> Makes sense, thanks.
> 
> I'm thinking about dropping this file from this series and submitting
> it separately for Greg to Ack.
> 
> Unless he sees our exchange and acks it here. :)

I can't ack a patch that is incorrect :(

Please fix it up and resend...

thanks,

greg k-h