[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a56bd4f9-d76b-4924-a901-554d71ea17bd@quicinc.com>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 07:54:23 -0700
From: Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@...cinc.com>
To: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
CC: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo
Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<ath10k@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@...wrt.com>,
Steve deRosier <derosier@...-sierra.com>,
Stefan Lippers-Hollmann
<s.l-h@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14] ath10k: add LED and GPIO controlling support for
various chipsets
On 5/10/2024 7:14 AM, Christian Marangi wrote:
> On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 09:48:08AM -0700, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>> On 5/9/2024 9:37 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>>> On 5/8/2024 9:50 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>>> Sorry for the delay but finally I looked at this again. I decided to
>>>> just remove the fixme and otherwise it looks good for me. Please check
>>>> my changes:
>>>>
>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/ath.git/commit/?h=pending&id=688130a66ed49f20ca0ce02c3987f6a474f7c93a
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have a question about the copyrights in the two new files:
>>> + * Copyright (c) 2018-2023, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>>>
>>> My understanding is that Qualcomm's affiliation with Linux Foundation via Code
>>> Aurora ended in December 2021, and hence any contributions in 2022-2023 should
>>> be the copyright of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ok it seems like Kalle's v13 had:
>> + * Copyright (c) 2018, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>>
>> and Ansuel's v14 has:
>> + * Copyright (c) 2018-2023, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>>
>> So Ansuel, is your work on behalf of The Linux Foundation?
>>
>
> When I resubmitted this at times, I just updated the copyright to the
> current year so I guess it was wrong doing that?
>
> As you can see from the copyright header this patch went all around and
> I think at the end (around 2018) the Linux copyright was added as it was
> submitted upstream. (can't remember if maintainers were asking that)
>
> So me watching the old year and resubmitting it, just updated the date.
>
> Soo I think we should revert to 2018?
>
Yes, in this case changing the Linux Foundation copyright back to 2018 is correct.
/jeff
Powered by blists - more mailing lists