On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 05:19:28PM -0800, Philippe Ombredanne wrote: > > Miroslav, > > > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 3:54 AM, Miroslav Benes <mbenes@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Sat, 24 Feb 2018, Philippe Ombredanne wrote: > > > > > >> Joe, > > >> > > >> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> > Add a simple atomic replace / cumulative livepatch example. > > >> > > > >> > Signed-off-by: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@xxxxxxxxxx> > > >> > --- > > >> > samples/livepatch/Makefile | 1 + > > >> > samples/livepatch/livepatch-cumulative.c | 216 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >> > 2 files changed, 217 insertions(+) > > >> > create mode 100644 samples/livepatch/livepatch-cumulative.c > > >> > > > >> > diff --git a/samples/livepatch/Makefile b/samples/livepatch/Makefile > > >> > index 2472ce39a18d..dd0e2a8af1af 100644 > > >> > --- a/samples/livepatch/Makefile > > >> > +++ b/samples/livepatch/Makefile > > >> > @@ -5,3 +5,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SAMPLE_LIVEPATCH) += livepatch-shadow-fix2.o > > >> > obj-$(CONFIG_SAMPLE_LIVEPATCH) += livepatch-callbacks-demo.o > > >> > obj-$(CONFIG_SAMPLE_LIVEPATCH) += livepatch-callbacks-mod.o > > >> > obj-$(CONFIG_SAMPLE_LIVEPATCH) += livepatch-callbacks-busymod.o > > >> > +obj-$(CONFIG_SAMPLE_LIVEPATCH) += livepatch-cumulative.o > > >> > diff --git a/samples/livepatch/livepatch-cumulative.c b/samples/livepatch/livepatch-cumulative.c > > >> > new file mode 100644 > > >> > index 000000000000..ab036439e08c > > >> > --- /dev/null > > >> > +++ b/samples/livepatch/livepatch-cumulative.c > > >> > @@ -0,0 +1,216 @@ > > >> > +/* > > >> > + * Copyright (C) 2018 Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@xxxxxxxxxx> > > >> > + * > > >> > + * 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, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. > > >> > + */ > > >> > > >> May be you could use the new SPDX tags instead of this fine but long > > >> legalese? [1] > > >> This would replace ~12 lines of comment by a single line with the same effect. > > >> Thanks! > > > > > > I don't know about that. How come it is perceived as equivalent? I mean, > > > we have a well-established way how to say that a particular source > > > code/file is distributed with GPL license. Well-established means that > > > it's been tested in court AFAIK many times. Even the license itself (found > > > in COPYING file) mentions this as way how to attach the license to a file. > > > > > > Now you want it to be replaced with a tag. Does it say the same? It might. > > > It might not. Do we know? Have you got a court ruling which would say that > > > this is also a way how to attach a license to a file? I doubt it. It may > > > seem trivially clear, but there are no such things in the legal world. > > > > > > Don't make me wrong. I don't like that copyright thingie much. I don't > > > like that you can find even different versions of the text in the kernel > > > source code (and not only there). > > > > > > However I'd prefer to leave at least a note there that the file is still > > > distributed under the terms of GPL found in COPYING file. The tag can be > > > there too, if it makes someone happy. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Miroslav > > > > > >> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst > > >> -- > > >> Philippe > > >> > > > > > > > To the best of my knowledge, this has been debated in person and on > > list among maintainers and agreed to. > > This has also been reviewed by the LF lawyers. The result of is the > > documentation in [1] > > You are welcomed not to agree of course, but this would make your > > contributions stand out with its legalese boilerplate when we are > > trying to get of it. > > > > Greg, anything else to add? > > Yes, do not add new "boiler plate" license code in new files, otherwise > you will just have to rip them out again later on. If you have > questions about this, please contact your company's lawyers, as they > know all about this issue and last I heard, agreed with it. I certainly will. Thanks. Miroslav -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe live-patching" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
