On Sun, 2021-12-26 at 14:19 +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> I wonder if checkpatch could alert about considering GPL-2.0+ when
> adding new files.
No. Licensing is up to the author/submitter.
One nit checkpatch could warn about is the use of MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2")
rather than MODULE_LICENSE("GPL") as that's an unnecessary distinction.
See: https://lore.kernel.org/all/alpine.DEB.2.21.1901282105450.1669@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Given there are a several thousand existing uses of "GPL v2" in the
kernel, do this check only for new patches and not existing files.
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index b01c36a15d9dd..5b00f1f491aff 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -7418,6 +7418,10 @@ sub process {
WARN("MODULE_LICENSE",
"unknown module license " . $extracted_string . "\n" . $herecurr);
}
+ if (!$file && $extracted_string eq '"GPL v2"') {
+ WARN("MODULE_LICENSE",
+ "Prefer \"GPL\" over \"GPL v2\" - see: https://lore.kernel.org/all/alpine.DEB.2.21.1901282105450.1669\@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/\n"; . $herecurr);
+ }
}
# check for sysctl duplicate constants
