[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230613-library-enigmatic-267396f84d78@spud>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 19:44:58 +0100
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com, sre@...nel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] dt-bindings: power: reset: atmel,sama5d2-shdwc:
convert to yaml
On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 12:09:24PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> On 08/06/2023 at 18:49, Conor Dooley wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 08:38:10AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> >
> > > For reference, anything done by Arm, Linaro or NVIDIA employees is
> > > okay to relicense to dual license.
> > Ah cool, that's good to know, thanks.
> > Perhaps I should try to get a similar edict issued for Microchip ones.
> > @Nicolas, does that sound reasonable?
>
> Well, we can work it out internally, indeed. But is there a public statement
> about this somewhere?
You mean, is there a public statement about Arm/Linaro/Nvidia being okay
with relicensing bindings as dual license?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists