Hi Luka/Stephen, This is my mistake, I seem to use an old license header on it. Just like "clk-mt7986-eth.c" in the same patch series, https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211217121148.6753-4-sam.shih@xxxxxxxxxxxx/ I intend to license "clk-mt7986-apmixed.c", "clk-mt7986-infracfg.c", and "clk-mt7986-topckgen" under the kernel's standard GPL-2.0. Should I need to resend this patch? Or I can just send a follow-up patch to fix it? Regards, Sam On Mon, 2022-01-10 at 10:56 +0100, Lukas Bulwahn wrote: > Dear Sam, > > > Thanks for contributing the mt7986 clock support to the kernel > repository with commit ec97d23c8e22 ("clk: mediatek: add mt7986 clock > support"). > > You have marked the files below with the GPL-1.0 License, which > ./scripts/spdxcheck.py identifies and warns about: > > drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986-apmixed.c: 1:28 Invalid License ID: > GPL-1.0 > drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986-infracfg.c: 1:28 Invalid License ID: > GPL-1.0 > drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt7986-topckgen.c: 1:28 Invalid License ID: > GPL-1.0 > > The kernel's licensing rules are described here: > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/license-rules.html*kernel-licensing__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3vjYIYa2VqgzRgsUxjx-mwtOtidbamcTDphKaMUo-7ql0YlaB4Qi_Xc-1vDpFfju$ > > > The GPL-1.0 is a deprecated license in the kernel repository. > > Driver code that is licensed with GPL-1.0 might not be compatible > with > GPL-2.0. I am not a lawyer, and we probably do not want to require > all > users of your driver code to needlessly involve a lawyer to get such > a > statement on license compatibility. > > Do you really intend to license this code under GPL-1.0 and are you > aware of all the consequences for other developers and users? Or is > this a mistake and you intend to license it under the kernel's > standard GPL-2.0 license? > > > Best regards, > > Lukas
