linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/11] can: rcar: use SPDX identifier for Renesas drivers

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:   Wed, 22 Aug 2018 21:31:33 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>
Cc:     Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...il.com>,
        Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
        Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] can: rcar: use SPDX identifier for Renesas drivers

On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 08:16:45PM +0200, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
> Hi Fabio,
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de> wrote:
> >>
> >>> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> >>>
> >>> According to Documentation/process/license-rules.rst the format should
> >>> be like this instead:
> >>>
> >>> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> >>
> >> According to https://spdx.org/licenses/ it should be what I did above.
> >
> > Previous advice I saw was to follow the format described in
> > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
> >
> > Greg/Philippe,
> >
> > Any inputs on this matter?
> >
> > Thanks
> 
> IMHO we should always treat and use the
> Documentation/process/license-rules.rst as the reference and not SPDX
> proper who moves at its own pace and evolves its specs and license ids
> independently of where we stand in the kernel.
> If this is not right Doc patches are welcomed!
> In this is very specific case this has been discussed on list a few
> times. If I recall correctly Thomas also had an opinion on this...
> So you are correct and this should be for now:
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+

That is correct, stick with that format/version for now please.

thanks,

greg k-h