netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] drivers: watchdog: Replace GPL license notice with SPDX identifier

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]

Date: Sat, 13 May 2023 09:43:39 -0400
From: Richard Fontana <rfontana@...hat.com>
To: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
Cc: Linux SPDX Licenses <linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, 
	Linux Staging Drivers <linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev>, 
	Linux Watchdog Devices <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux Kernel Actions <linux-actions@...ts.infradead.org>, 
	Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@...ow.org>, Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, 
	David Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>, Karsten Keil <isdn@...ux-pingi.de>, 
	Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>, Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Sam Creasey <sammy@...my.net>, 
	Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>, Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>, 
	Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>, Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>, 
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>, 
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>, Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>, 
	Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>, Ray Lehtiniemi <rayl@...l.com>, Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>, 
	Andrey Panin <pazke@...pac.ru>, Oleg Drokin <green@...mea.edu>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, 
	Jonas Jensen <jonas.jensen@...il.com>, Sylver Bruneau <sylver.bruneau@...glemail.com>, 
	Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@....com>, Denis Turischev <denis@...pulab.co.il>, 
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>, Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] drivers: watchdog: Replace GPL license notice
 with SPDX identifier

On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 6:53 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/12/23 19:46, Richard Fontana wrote:
> > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 6:07 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c
> >> index 504be461f992a9..822bf8905bf3ce 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c
> >> @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
> >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0+
> >>  /*
> >>   * Watchdog driver for SiByte SB1 SoCs
> >>   *
> >> @@ -38,10 +39,6 @@
> >>   *     (c) Copyright 1996 Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
> >>   *                                             All Rights Reserved.
> >>   *
> >> - *     This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> >> - *     modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
> >> - *     version 1 or 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation.
> >
> > Shouldn't this be
> > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0 OR GPL-2.0
> > (or in current SPDX notation GPL-1.0-only OR GPL-2.0-only) ?
> >
>
> Nope, as it will fail spdxcheck.py. Also, SPDX specification [1]
> doesn't have negation operator (NOT), thus the licensing requirement
> on the above notice can't be expressed reliably in SPDX here.
>
> [1]: https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2.3/SPDX-license-expressions/

The GPL identifiers in recent versions of SPDX include an `-only` and
an `-or-later` variant. So I don't see why you can't represent it as
`GPL-1.0-only OR GPL-2.0-only`. From what I understand the kernel
requires/prefers use of the earlier approach to GPL identifiers (which
was better in my opinion) under which `GPL-1.0 OR GPL-2.0` would at
least be semantically similar. I don't see why you need a negation
operator in this case. You have other patches where you used the
`-only` identifiers.

Richard