[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7hwn5jqrxf.fsf@baylibre.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 16:38:52 -0800
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>
To: Yu Tu <yu.tu@...ogic.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
Cc: "kelvin . zhang" <Kelvin.Zhang@...ogic.com>,
"qi . duan" <qi.duan@...ogic.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 1/3] dt-bindings: clock: document Amlogic S4 SoC PLL
& peripheral clock controller
Yu Tu <yu.tu@...ogic.com> writes:
> On 2023/1/16 16:29, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
[...]
>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..bbec5094d5c3
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@
>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) */
>>
>> Unusual license... are you sure to license the bindings under GPLv4 or
>> GPLv5? Fine by me.
>>
>
> Yes.
The rest of the bindings for Amlogic SoCs are GPL-2.0 (without the '+').
Adding the dual-license for MIT seems fine, but adding the '+' is
curious.
It would be helpful if you could please explain why you'd like these
bindings to be licensed differently than the rest of the SoC family.
Kevin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists