On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 08:11:13AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 11:29:42PM +0000, Wei Liu wrote: > > > > > > diff --git a/include/uapi/hyperv/hvgdk.h b/include/uapi/hyperv/hvgdk.h > > > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > > > index 000000000000..9bcbb7d902b2 > > > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > > > +++ b/include/uapi/hyperv/hvgdk.h > > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ > > > > > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT */ > > > > > > > > > > That's usually not a good license for a new uapi .h file, why did you > > > > > choose this one? > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is chosen so that other Microsoft developers who don't normally > > > > work on Linux can review this code. > > > > > > Sorry, but that's not how kernel development is done. Please fix your > > > internal review processes and use the correct uapi header file license. > > > > > > If your lawyers insist on this license, that's fine, but please have > > > them provide a signed-off-by on the patch that adds it and have it > > > documented why it is this license in the changelog AND in a comment in > > > the file so we can understand what is going on with it. > > > > > > > We went through an internal review with our legal counsel regarding the > > MIT license. We have an approval from them. > > > > Let me ask if using something like "GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note OR > > MIT" is possible. > > That marking makes no sense from a legal point of view, please work with > your lawyers as it seems they do not understand license descriptions > very well :( I've got the clearance to use "GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note". We can close on this issue. Thank you for the review. Thanks, Wei. > > thanks, > > greg k-h
