[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231018180128.GA719006@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 15:01:28 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] misc: mlx5ctl: Add mlx5ctl misc driver
On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 10:30:00AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 01:19:38AM -0700, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR Linux-OpenIB
>
> For dual-licensed code, I need a LOT of documentation as to why this
> must be dual-licensed, AND a signed-off-by from your corporate lawyer
> agreeing to it so they convey an understanding of just how complex and
> messy this will get over time and what you are agreeing to do here.
Can you provide a brief or whitepaper discussing this complexity
please? This pushback is news to me, Mellanox and the RDMA ecosystem
has been doing this for over 15 years now. I would need something
substantive to have a conversation with our legal.
However, I believe we can get an exception approval for single license
MIT or BSD-3-Clause for this code.
Thanks,
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists