[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230410170915.GE1391488@zorba>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2023 17:09:15 +0000
From: "Daniel Walker (danielwa)" <danielwa@...co.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
CC: "xe-linux-external(mailer list)" <xe-linux-external@...co.com>,
"Marcin Wierzbicki -X (mawierzb - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco)"
<mawierzb@...co.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] dt-bindings: cisco: document the CrayAR
compatibles
On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 05:28:03PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/04/2023 18:04, Daniel Walker (danielwa) wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 09:12:34AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
> >>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> >>
> >> Dual license.
> >>
> >
> > What are my choices here? I see this,
> >
> > # SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
>
> Yes, the one suggested by the checkpatch. Did you run it?
I don't recall if I did or not.
> >
> > Which appears to be what your suggesting. I also see this,
> >
> > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> >
> > I'd rather use the later.
>
> Why? Bindings should be licensed under BSD, so what is the reason to
> make here exception?
I'm sure I can re-license my submissions. I'd have to look into it.
Dainel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists