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: <20181127074702.GE13965@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Nov 2018 08:47:02 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     thesven73@...il.com
Cc:     svendev@...x.com, robh+dt@...nel.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        lee.jones@...aro.org, mark.rutland@....com, afaerber@...e.de,
        treding@...dia.com, david@...hnology.com, noralf@...nnes.org,
        johan@...nel.org, monstr@...str.eu, michal.vokac@...ft.com,
        arnd@...db.de, john.garry@...wei.com, geert+renesas@...der.be,
        robin.murphy@....com, paul.gortmaker@...driver.com,
        sebastien.bourdelin@...oirfairelinux.com, icenowy@...c.io,
        stuyoder@...il.com, maxime.ripard@...tlin.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH anybus v4 1/7] fieldbus_dev: add Fieldbus Device
 subsystem.

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 10:07:03AM -0500, thesven73@...il.com wrote:
> Fieldbus device (client) adapters allow data exchange with a PLC aka.
> "Fieldbus Controller" over a fieldbus (Profinet, FLNet, etc.)
> 
> They are typically used when a Linux device wants to expose itself
> as an actuator, motor, console light, switch, etc. over the fieldbus.
> 
> This framework is designed to provide a generic interface to Fieldbus
> Devices from both the Linux Kernel and the userspace.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sven Van Asbroeck <svendev@...x.com>

License nit:

> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/fieldbus/dev_core.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,355 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0

That's great, but then you write:

> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");

Which means "GPLv2+".  So this MODULE_LICENSE() should be "GPL v2",
right?

thanks,

greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ