[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQJUvfKmN6=j5hzhgE25XSa2uqR3MJyq+c=AGCKkTKD05g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2022 14:38:06 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>
Cc: bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpftool: Add SPDX identifier to btf-dump-file output
On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 4:01 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz> wrote:
>
> A concern about potential GPL violations came up at the new $DAYJOB when
> I tried to vendor the vmlinux.h output. The central point was that the
> generated vmlinux.h does not embed a license string -- making the
> licensing of the file non-obvious.
>
> This commit adds a LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause SPDX license identifier to
> the generated vmlinux.h output. This is line with what bpftool generates
> in object file skeletons.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>
> ---
> tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c
> index a2c665beda87..fca810a27768 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c
> @@ -425,6 +425,7 @@ static int dump_btf_c(const struct btf *btf,
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> + printf("/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause) */\n\n");
I don't think we can add any kind of license identifier
to the auto generated output.
vmlinux.h is a pretty printed dwarfdump.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists