| Message ID | 20180821220233.9202-6-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
| Series | tree-wide: use SPDX identifier for Renesas drivers | expand |
Hi Wolfram, On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 7:02 PM, Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> wrote: > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> > --- > > To be applied individually per subsystem tree. Morimoto-san, could you maybe > ack this with your Renesas address? > > drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_can.c | 6 +----- > drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_canfd.c | 6 +----- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_can.c b/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_can.c > index 11662f479e76..051bf4ef4be2 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_can.c > +++ b/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_can.c > @@ -1,12 +1,8 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later According to Documentation/process/license-rules.rst the format should be like this instead: // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later > > According to Documentation/process/license-rules.rst the format should > be like this instead: > > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ According to https://spdx.org/licenses/ it should be what I did above.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> wrote: > >> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later >> >> According to Documentation/process/license-rules.rst the format should >> be like this instead: >> >> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > > According to https://spdx.org/licenses/ it should be what I did above. Previous advice I saw was to follow the format described in Documentation/process/license-rules.rst Greg/Philippe, Any inputs on this matter? Thanks
Hi Fabio, On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> wrote: >> >>> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later >>> >>> According to Documentation/process/license-rules.rst the format should >>> be like this instead: >>> >>> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >> >> According to https://spdx.org/licenses/ it should be what I did above. > > Previous advice I saw was to follow the format described in > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst > > Greg/Philippe, > > Any inputs on this matter? > > Thanks IMHO we should always treat and use the Documentation/process/license-rules.rst as the reference and not SPDX proper who moves at its own pace and evolves its specs and license ids independently of where we stand in the kernel. If this is not right Doc patches are welcomed! In this is very specific case this has been discussed on list a few times. If I recall correctly Thomas also had an opinion on this... So you are correct and this should be for now: // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 08:16:45PM +0200, Philippe Ombredanne wrote: > Hi Fabio, > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> wrote: > >> > >>> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later > >>> > >>> According to Documentation/process/license-rules.rst the format should > >>> be like this instead: > >>> > >>> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > >> > >> According to https://spdx.org/licenses/ it should be what I did above. > > > > Previous advice I saw was to follow the format described in > > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst > > > > Greg/Philippe, > > > > Any inputs on this matter? > > > > Thanks > > IMHO we should always treat and use the > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst as the reference and not SPDX > proper who moves at its own pace and evolves its specs and license ids > independently of where we stand in the kernel. > If this is not right Doc patches are welcomed! > In this is very specific case this has been discussed on list a few > times. If I recall correctly Thomas also had an opinion on this... > So you are correct and this should be for now: > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ That is correct, stick with that format/version for now please. thanks, greg k-h
> > IMHO we should always treat and use the > > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst as the reference and not SPDX > > proper who moves at its own pace and evolves its specs and license ids > > independently of where we stand in the kernel. > > If this is not right Doc patches are welcomed! > > In this is very specific case this has been discussed on list a few > > times. If I recall correctly Thomas also had an opinion on this... > > So you are correct and this should be for now: > > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > > That is correct, stick with that format/version for now please. OK, will fix.
diff --git a/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_can.c b/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_can.c index 11662f479e76..051bf4ef4be2 100644 --- a/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_can.c +++ b/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_can.c @@ -1,12 +1,8 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later /* Renesas R-Car CAN device driver * * Copyright (C) 2013 Cogent Embedded, Inc. <source@cogentembedded.com> * Copyright (C) 2013 Renesas Solutions Corp. - * - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it - * under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the - * Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your - * option) any later version. */ #include <linux/module.h> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_canfd.c b/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_canfd.c index 602c19e23f05..09a5b038a9f0 100644 --- a/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_canfd.c +++ b/drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_canfd.c @@ -1,11 +1,7 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later /* Renesas R-Car CAN FD device driver * * Copyright (C) 2015 Renesas Electronics Corp. - * - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it - * under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the - * Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your - * option) any later version. */ /* The R-Car CAN FD controller can operate in either one of the below two modes
Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> --- To be applied individually per subsystem tree. Morimoto-san, could you maybe ack this with your Renesas address? drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_can.c | 6 +----- drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_canfd.c | 6 +----- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)