On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 12:46, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 27/07/2022 09:09, Jagan Teki wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 12:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 27/07/2022 08:52, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 at 19:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski > >>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 26/07/2022 15:44, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>>>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 02:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski > >>>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 23/07/2022 22:43, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>>>>>> Add power-domain header for RV1126 SoC from description in TRM. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>> include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) > >>>>>>> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>>>>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>>>>> index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7 > >>>>>>> --- /dev/null > >>>>>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ > >>>>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Dual license and a blank line, please. > >>>>> > >>>>> Yes, all rockchip power includes (at least here) are GPL-2.0 what is > >>>>> the issue with it? > >>>> > >>>> The headers are part of bindings and all bindings should be dual > >>>> licensed, so they can be used in other projects. > >>>> > >>>> Of course if copyright holder does not agree to release it on BSD, then > >>>> it would be fine as exception. Also would be fine from us not to accept > >>>> such bindings. :) > >>> > >>> I don't hold anything here to use dual-licensing. The only thing I'm > >>> wondering here is none of the rockchip power includes (which are > >>> merged) are using dual-licensing they simply have GPL-2.0 which is > >>> used in BSP. Let me know what you suggest? > >> > >> Hm, I think you asked this above and I answered that dual license should > >> be used. Maybe we misunderstand each other? > > > > Sorry, I'm asking again as I'm liable to change the license here or not. > > > >> > >> Do you include in this header any work which cannot be licensed on BSD > >> (e.g. is derivative of existing GPL-2 work)? > > > > Yes, it is from BSP > > https://github.com/rockchip-linux/kernel/blob/develop-4.19/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > > Eh... if you don't have permission to relicense it and you copied the > IDs (although one would say it is not really copyrightable work), then > let it be GPL-2.0. In the future just write the IDs by yourself (not as > derivative work) and dual-license the header. Yes, I usually follow the dual-license if I wrote new ones in bindings. Thanks for the details. Jagan.
