Rob: On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:26:22AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 3:38 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > It's good to have SPDX identifiers in all files to make it easier to >> > audit the kernel tree for correct licenses. This patch adds these >> > identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/ based on a script and data from >> > Thomas Gleixner, Philippe Ombredanne, and Kate Stewart. >> > >> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Kate Stewart <kstewart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@xxxxxxxx> >> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > --- >> > Unless someone really complains, I'm going to add this to my tree for >> > 4.15-rc1. >> >> Glad to see this. I've been suggesting folks use SPDX tags on dts >> files as those are often dual licensed, so we have lots of license >> boilerplate. But I've had some push back[1] but it's not something I >> care to spend cycles on. It would be good to have some statement on >> the use of tags. Anything new should use them (I can dust off my >> checkpatch.pl check for this)? This is a good task for newbies? It's >> each maintainer's decision? It's the copyright holder's (and their >> lawyer's) decision? > > As for what type of a task this is, we have a script and a huge database > that has been worked on by some people to make a lot of this pretty > "automatic" to apply. I am one of the people that worked on scanning kernels for licenses using my scancode tool [1] to help there. Regarding checkpatch.pl and tooling to help review patches I can think of two things: 1. when there is SPDX identifier in a patch, it could be checked for validity I have a library for this [2] (this is in Python not Perl) but the checks needed should be fairly trivial since there is not an open number of license variations in the kernel: this could be re-written in Perl alright. 2. scancode can detect the licenses fairly accurately to spit and suggest an SPDX license identifier and/or provide input to remove boilerplate either for new patches or existing code. Not sure how to best integrate this as a patch check step. Docs? Server-side tool? Any idea? What would be the best thing to do next? [1] https://github.com/nexB/scancode-toolkit [2] https://github.com/nexB/license-expression/ -- Cordially Philippe Ombredanne -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
