Hello Krzysztof, > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Sent: Friday, April 22, 2022 4:17 PM > > On 22/04/2022 07:32, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote: > > Hello Krzysztof, > > > >> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 4:49 PM > >> > >> On 20/04/2022 10:42, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote: > >>> Add all Clock Pulse Generator Core Clock Outputs for the Renesas > >>> R-Car V4H (R8A779G0) SoC. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> include/dt-bindings/clock/r8a779g0-cpg-mssr.h | 87 +++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 87 insertions(+) > >>> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/clock/r8a779g0-cpg-mssr.h > >>> > >>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/r8a779g0-cpg-mssr.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/r8a779g0-cpg-mssr.h > >>> new file mode 100644 > >>> index 000000000000..07a94cf45581 > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/r8a779g0-cpg-mssr.h > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ > >>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 or MIT) */ > >> > >> Any reason why not licensing it the same as bindings document > >> (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)? The same applies to patch 5. > >> > >> MIT and BSD-2-clause are almost the same, AFAIR, so let's stick to one > >> (BSD-2-clause) for consistency? > > > > Since r8a779g0.dtsi (which uses this) is under (GPL-2.0 or MIT), I use it here. > > Also, r8a779g0.dtsi includes dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h and > > the arm-gic.h is under (GPL-2.0 or MIT). So, using it is better, IIUC. > > This would mean we want to license the bindings the same as we license > the DTS. It's not the case. For the bindings we have the strong > preference - GPL-2.0 or BSD-2-clause. For the DTS - not that much, just > recommendation, I think. Thank you very much for your comments. Now I understand the files in include/dt-bindings/ are also the bindings. > > In other words, r8a779g0.dtsi doesn't include any the bindings document > > so that there is not needed to use the same license, I think. > > # I'm not a lawyer though... > > If you would like to follow your recommendation, you should license also > schema as MIT, because your DTS uses it as well (as a derivative work). > > Anyway MIT and BSD-2-c are very similar, so there is no much difference > here. I got it. So, I'll change the license from (GPL-2.0 or MIT) to (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause). Best regards, Yoshihiro Shimoda
