On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 04:13:48PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 09:21:13AM +0000, Etienne CARRIERE - foss wrote: > > Hello Conor, > > > > > > > > From: Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2024 2:14 PM > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 05:33:46PM +0200, Etienne Carriere wrote: > > > > Change include/dt-bindings/mfd/st,stpmic1.h license model from GPLv2.0 > > > > only to dual GPLv2.0 or BSD-3-Clause. I have every legitimacy to request > > > > this change on behalf of STMicroelectronics. This change clarifies that > > > > this DT binding header file can be shared with software components as > > > > bootloaders and OSes that are not published under GPLv2 terms. > > > > > > > > In CC are all the contributors to this header file. > > > > > > > > Cc: Pascal Paillet <p.paillet@xxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > include/dt-bindings/mfd/st,stpmic1.h | 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/mfd/st,stpmic1.h b/include/dt-bindings/mfd/st,stpmic1.h > > > > index 321cd08797d9..957c48300cd4 100644 > > > > --- a/include/dt-bindings/mfd/st,stpmic1.h > > > > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/mfd/st,stpmic1.h > > > > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > > > > -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > > > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-3-Clause */ > > > > > > The usual dual license for bindings is BSD-2-Clause, was there a > > > specific request for the 3 version? > > > > My mistake. Thanks for spotting that. > > I have my company agreement for the 2 dual models: "OR BSD-2-Clause" and "OR BSD-3-Clause". > > We expect to conform to DT bindings preferred licensing model. Indeed the kernel documentation explicitly mention "GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause". > > We prefer to conform with it. I'll update my patch. > > > > By the way, I'll fix Lee Jones e-mail address that is deprecated. > > I figure this is a send-email mistake cos you have to do something > god-forsaken to send plaintext mail from the st mail system. "this" being that you sent a v1 reply in the thread of the v2, before then sending it again against v1.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
