On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 03:57:13PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:11:17PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > > > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/owl-s900-powergate.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/owl-s900-powergate.h > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > index 000000000000..f1aaf761112b > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/owl-s900-powergate.h > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ > > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > > > > > > checkpatch.pl warns about this line due to not using /* ... */ syntax > > > for headers. I could fix that up on my own, but it made me realize that > > > you are licensing this file under GPL-2.0+ only, whereas the .dts[i] is > > > supposed to be dual-licensed. > > > > > > Can you please give your consent to make this > > > > > > /* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) */ > > > > > > > You can change the license to GPL-2.0+ OR MIT. > > > > > like my S500 and S700 bindings? > > > > > > Question: Should it still be GPL-2.0+ or the new GPL-2.0-or-later? > > > > > > > I think GPL-2.0+ is fine. > > So... when I saw this I did wonder why one would knowly choose to use a > deprecated license identifier (https://spdx.org/licenses/ ). > > However running `git diff v4.17..v4.18-rc1` through some filters does > indicate that GPL-2.0+ is the more popular choice by 256 to 0! Doesn't > mean you couldn't break the mould though ;-). > I did grep through the source and hit with same numbers ;-) But I was not sure whether to break the mould or not, so chose the safest path :) Since you already gave the green signal, I think we can move to new style identifier. Thanks, Mani > > Daniel. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
