linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 02/22] soundwire: fix SPDX license for header files

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: <20190501160503.GB19281@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 May 2019 18:05:03 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        tiwai@...e.de, broonie@...nel.org, vkoul@...nel.org,
        liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com, jank@...ence.com, joe@...ches.com,
        srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org,
        Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/22] soundwire: fix SPDX license for header files

On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 10:57:25AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> No C++ comments in .h files

That's not really the issue here.

> 
> Reviewed-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/soundwire/bus.h            | 4 ++--
>  drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.h | 4 ++--
>  drivers/soundwire/intel.h          | 4 ++--
>  3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/bus.h b/drivers/soundwire/bus.h
> index c77de05b8100..2f8436584e7f 100644
> --- a/drivers/soundwire/bus.h
> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/bus.h
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> -// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause)
> -// Copyright(c) 2015-17 Intel Corporation.
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause) */
> +/* Copyright(c) 2015-17 Intel Corporation. */

The first line is fine to change, as that was the requirement (although
I think it has now been fixed), the second line is just taste, whatever
you want, it's not a requirement.

But I really don't care, it's not my code :)

thanks,

greg k-h