On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 08:12:44AM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 2/8/22 12:00 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > > Sure, there are lots of structured files in there like .rst ones which > > have SPDX headers but this is just a free format text file so it's not > > clear what if any format to use. > I think SPDX is applicable to all files free format or not. Are you seeing > any build warns during doc build on this? No, but I'm not exactly going out of my way to do anything with them. As far as I know these files don't get touched during builds, they just exist in the kernel tree. If there is some way of generating warnings from them there are quite a lot of other such files already there and doing so. Like I say I can't find any evidence that anyone has looked at adding SPDX to these files, as far as I know the long term plan such as it is is to convert to other formats and I can't immediately think how one would do it otherwise in a way that works well. I'm sure the license compliance people would find adding annotations useful but working out how to do that sensibly for these files seems beyond the scope of this series.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
