On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:52:39AM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> On 27/11/2018 15:23, John Garry wrote:
> > On 27/11/2018 14:43, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 10:15:32PM +0800, John Garry wrote:
> > > > Currently sas_task.c has no license specifier, so add SPDX license
> > > > identifier for GPL-2.0+.
> > > >
> > > > As mentioned in commit b24413180f56 ("License cleanup: add SPDX GPL-2.0
> > > > license identifier to files with no license"), files with no license in
> > > > the kernel are under default kernel license.
> > >
> > > The default is GPLv2, not v2+.
> >
> > So sas_task.c should be v2.
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> I also note that currently we have an inconsistency in license of
> sas_init.c:
>
> /*
> * Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) Transport Layer initialization
> *
> * Copyright (C) 2005 Adaptec, Inc. All rights reserved.
> * Copyright (C) 2005 Luben Tuikov <luben_tuikov@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> *
> * This file is licensed under GPLv2.
> *
> * 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; either version 2 of the
> * License, or (at your option) any later version.
> *
> * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU
> * General Public License for more details.
> *
> * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> * along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307
> * USA
> *
> */
>
> ...
>
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Luben Tuikov <luben_tuikov@xxxxxxxxxxx>");
> MODULE_DESCRIPTION("SAS Transport Layer");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
>
> So the license specifies v2+ but module license states v2.
>
> I could not find a docment for guidance on this. I also note that making
> sas_task.c v2 would mean mixing v2 and v2+ into the module.
This is not the only file in the kernel with this problem.
For now, we have been trusting the "written text" lines over the
MODULE_LICENSE() lines, as that seems to be the proper way forward.
> I did find an example of someone changing the license:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c?h=v4.20-rc4&id=15c566fcff9cc7b8fd64461d6ee6fd1bc665b444
>
Yup, not good, that should be fixed.
> Then someone changes the module license (but same company):
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/sound/soc/sh/rcar/core.c?h=v4.20-rc4&id=1e0edd4deadbbacd3b35179c233efa26624ab2af
That should be fine, the text says the correct one.
> At this point I'm reluctant to touch this in case I mess up, but there is
> still the missing license in sas_task.c .
Don't touch things like this unless you know _EXACTLY_ what you are
doing...
good luck!
greg k-h
