Em Sun, 22 Aug 2021 12:27:30 +0800
Cai Huoqing <caihuoqing@xxxxxxxxx> escreveu:
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0+
> /*
> * videobuf2-vmalloc.c - vmalloc memory allocator for videobuf2
> *
> * Copyright (C) 2010 Samsung Electronics
> *
> * Author: Pawel Osciak <pawel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> - *
> - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> - * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> - * the Free Software Foundation.
> */
That doesn't sound right.
See, all code at the Kernel is under GPLv2, as stated at the global
Kernel licensing files. Btw, a driver with just:
MODULE_LICENSE("GPL")
is actually under GPLv2 (eventually: or later and/or dual-licensed).
There's nothing in the text implying GPLv2 or later. So, using a
GPL-x.x+ doesn't fit here.
Ok, one might argue that the code is GPL 1.0 to 2.0, but VB2 is
a derivative work from VB1, which was originally written with
GPL v2 or later:
https://linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/video4linux/video-buf.h?view=markup&revision=1.9&root=v4l
So, the only license that fits here is GPLv2.
On other words, except if all VB2 authors explicitly send their
SoB to change the licensing terms (with should likely include
also VB1 authors) to allow dual-licensing it or to extend it
to other GPL versions, the right license here is, instead, just
GPLv2, e. g.:
SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
Thanks,
Mauro
