On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 02:42, Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 02:06, <luca.boccassi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in >> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the >> samples are still GPL2-only. >> >> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example >> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd >> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h >> >> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow >> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: >> >> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") >> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") >> >> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived >> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with >> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently >> not possible. >> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping >> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: >> >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html >> >> The authors of this file according to git log are: >> >> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@xxxxxxxxx> >> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Acked-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Chenbo Feng <fengc@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Daniel Mack <daniel@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Joe Stringer <joe@xxxxxxx> >> Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxx> >> >> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) >> >> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the >> above list of authors will be necessary. >> >> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both >> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus >> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could >> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue >> we are currently facing. >> >> samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 >> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ >> /* eBPF instruction mini library */ >> #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H >> #define __BPF_INSN_H >> -- >> 2.33.0 >> Acked-by: Joe Stringer <joe@xxxxxxx>
