linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 3/6] selftests: add tests

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 22 May 2022 16:37:19 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     tj@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jeyu@...nel.org,
        shuah@...nel.org, bvanassche@....org, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
        joe@...ches.com, keescook@...omium.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        minchan@...nel.org, linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/6] selftests: add tests_sysfs module

Greg,

On Fri, Dec 03 2021 at 16:29, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 11:44:57AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:

sorry for missing this thread. I came accross it now as I'm looking into
the licensing mess again.

>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later OR copyleft-next-0.3.1
>
> Again, sorry, but no, I am going to object to this license as you are
> only accessing a GPL-v2-only api.  Any other license on a file that
> interacts with that, especially for core stuff like testing the
> functionality of this code, needs to have that same license.  Sorry.

That's a bogus argument. First of all the code is dual licensed and
second we have enough code in the kernel which is licensed MIT/BSD and
happily can access the GPL-v2-only APIs.

Aside of that we have already code in the kernel which is dual licensed

     GPL-2.0-or-later OR copyleft-next-0.3.1

We just can't make it SPDX clean because copyleft-next-0.3.1 is not in
LICENSING.

While I agree that we want to keep the number of licenses as small as
possible, we cannot really dictate which dual licensing options a
submitter selects unless the license is GPL-2.0-only incompatible, which
copyleft-next is not.

Can we just get over this, add the license with the SPDX identifier and
move on?

Thanks,

        tglx