linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rust: macros: add `paste!` proc macro

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: <20230809230249.01ffc009.gary@garyguo.net>
Date:   Wed, 9 Aug 2023 23:02:49 +0100
From:   Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>
To:     Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
        Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
        Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>,
        Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: macros: add `paste!` proc macro

On Wed, 9 Aug 2023 23:45:34 +0200
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 7:12 PM Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net> wrote:
> >
> > diff --git a/rust/macros/paste.rs b/rust/macros/paste.rs
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..42fde0930b05
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/rust/macros/paste.rs
> > @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
> > +use proc_macro::{Delimiter, Group, Ident, Spacing, Span, TokenTree};  
> 
> We need the license identifier to apply this -- is it our usual one?
> 
>     // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> 
> If so, for the record, could you please confirm it is? Then I will add
> it on my side and apply it -- thanks!
> 
> Cheers,
> Miguel

Hi Miguel,

Sorry I forgot to add license comments!

All my kernel contributions are permissively licensed if possible, so I
am fine with this being either MIT or GPL-2.0 (I think GPL-2.0 is
deprecated in as a SPDX license identifier and it should be
GPL-2.0-only going forward, though).

Given this is non-kernel specific generic code, I think it might worth
following the convention of the paste and pin-init code and make it
`Apache-2.0 OR MIT`? This would also make it the same license as the
`paste` crate (although we don't have to keep the same license as this
is a different implementation).

I'll leave the final decision to you.

Best,
Gary