[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190815140400.GA7174@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 16:04:00 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc: Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro@...renesas.com>,
Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Chris Paterson <Chris.Paterson2@...esas.com>,
Biju Das <biju.das@...renesas.com>,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com>,
Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] drm: Rename drm_bridge_timings to drm_timings
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 04:18:38PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Fabrizio,
>
> (CC'ing Greg as the architect of the SPDX move)
_one of_, not the one that did the most of he work, that would be Thomas :)
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:04:27PM +0100, Fabrizio Castro wrote:
> > The information represented by drm_bridge_timings is also
> > needed by panels, therefore rename drm_bridge_timings to
> > drm_timings.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro@...renesas.com>
> > Link: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-renesas-soc/msg43271.html
> >
> > ---
> > v1->v2:
> > * new patch
> >
> > I have copied the license from include/drm/drm_bridge.h as that's
> > where the struct originally came from. What's the right SPDX license
> > to use in this case?
>
> https://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Decisions/Dealing_with_Public_Domain_within_SPDX_Files
>
> Greg, any idea on how we should handle this ?
Ugh, what lunacy. But drm_bridge.h is NOT under any "public domain"
license, so why is that an issue here? This looks like a "normal" bsd 3
clause license to me, right?
So I would just use "BSD-3-Clause" as the SPDX license here, if I were
doing this patch...
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists