linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/10] arm64: dts: qcom: Add pm8010 pmic dtsi

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: <3a84d45c-6550-7ae2-2511-9f61d15894d1@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 18 Nov 2022 15:59:16 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     neil.armstrong@...aro.org, Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] arm64: dts: qcom: Add pm8010 pmic dtsi

On 18/11/2022 15:58, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> On 17/11/2022 13:51, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/11/2022 11:31, Abel Vesa wrote:
>>> From: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
>>>
>>> Add nodes for pm8010 in separate dtsi file.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8010.dtsi | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   1 file changed, 84 insertions(+)
>>>   create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8010.dtsi
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8010.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8010.dtsi
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..0ea641e12209
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8010.dtsi
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
>>
>> Any reason why this is licensed BSD-3 clause? It's not a recommended
>> license (2 clause is). Same for other patches.
> 
> Probably a bad copy-paste from other existing files.
> 
> While checking, the majority of arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm*.dtsi uses BSD-3-Clause
> so it seems this was done for quite a while now.

If it is derivative work (of upstrea, downstream), then you might have
to keep BSD-3. But if not, how about changing it to BSD-2?

Best regards,
Krzysztof