[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231018084908.GF5392@unreal>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 11:49:08 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...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>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...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.
This is how we (NBU, Networking Business Unit in Nvidia, former Mellanox)
are instructed to submit all our code by default. This license is aligned
with our networking, vdpa and RDMA code.
So yes, our legal understands pros and cons of dual-license code.
Thanks
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists