linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] random: add proper SPDX header

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: <CAHmME9qOSpjzUhwkXoL9OagBzKj51mPr=f-tNNnLCEQsAdWSmg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Feb 2022 17:53:33 +0100
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] random: add proper SPDX header

Hi Greg,

Thanks for the review. Comments are inline below.

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 5:49 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Where did the "or later" come from?  I don't see that in the original
> text.

Yea, this part seems a little bit ambiguous:

> > - * ALTERNATIVELY, this product may be distributed under the terms of
> > - * the GNU General Public License, in which case the provisions of the GPL are
> > - * required INSTEAD OF the above restrictions.  (This clause is
> > - * necessary due to a potential bad interaction between the GPL and
> > - * the restrictions contained in a BSD-style copyright.)
>
> I do not see a "or later" here.

I don't see a "2.0" either. I think we can infer from context that it
couldn't have been < 2.0. So in the absence of a number, maybe this
means >= 2.0, and hence "or later"? Or since at the time it probably
meant 2.0, do we infer this to mean == 2.0? I really have no idea,
which is why I'm glad this list exists.

It sounds like your perspective is that this is == 2.0?

> > diff --git a/include/linux/random.h b/include/linux/random.h
> > index e92efb39779c..1a6861aa1277 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/random.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/random.h
> > @@ -1,9 +1,4 @@
> >  /* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> > -/*
> > - * include/linux/random.h
> > - *
> > - * Include file for the random number generator.
> > - */
>
> This doesn't have to do with the SPDX change in the other file, it
> belongs in a different patch, sorry.

Ack.

Jason