| Message ID | 20230512100620.36807-1-bagasdotme@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Treewide GPL SPDX conversion and cleanup (in response to Didi's GPL full name fixes) | expand |
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 05:06:11PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > I trigger this patch series as a response to Didi's GPL full name fix > patches [1], for which all of them had been NAKed. In many cases, the > appropriate correction is to use SPDX license identifier instead. > > Often, when replacing license notice boilerplates with their equivalent > SPDX identifier, the notice doesn't mention explicit GPL version. Greg > [2] replied this question by falling back to GPL 1.0 (more precisely > GPL 1.0+ in order to be compatible with GPL 2.0 used by Linux kernel), > although there are exceptions (mostly resolved by inferring from > older patches covering similar situation). > > The series covers the same directories touched as Didi's ones, minus > Documentation/ (as should have been inferred by SPDX tags on respective > docs). > I'm glad to take these types of changes through the SPDX tree, but please break them up into smaller changes that show the justification for each type of change in each subsystem, so that we can evaluate them on an individual basis. As you did here, you are lumping things together only by the existance of the file in the tree, not by the logical type of change happening, which isn't ok. Also, you can send them as subsystem-specific series, so as to not have to cross-post all of the changes all over the place. I doubt the drm developers care about ethernet driver license issues :) thanks, greg k-h
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 6:07 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > index 504be461f992a9..822bf8905bf3ce 100644 > --- a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0+ > /* > * Watchdog driver for SiByte SB1 SoCs > * > @@ -38,10 +39,6 @@ > * (c) Copyright 1996 Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, > * All Rights Reserved. > * > - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > - * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License > - * version 1 or 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation. Shouldn't this be // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0 OR GPL-2.0 (or in current SPDX notation GPL-1.0-only OR GPL-2.0-only) ?
On 5/12/23 17:06, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/octeon-wdt-nmi.S b/drivers/watchdog/octeon-wdt-nmi.S > index 97f6eb7b5a8e04..57bb0845de477d 100644 > --- a/drivers/watchdog/octeon-wdt-nmi.S > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/octeon-wdt-nmi.S > @@ -1,8 +1,5 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0+ */ > /* > - * This file is subject to the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public > - * License. See the file "COPYING" in the main directory of this archive > - * for more details. > - * Oops, still incorrect tag. Will fix in v3 (should be out on next Monday).
Hi, Am 12.05.23 um 12:06 schrieb Bagas Sanjaya: > Many watchdog drivers's source files has already SPDX license > identifier, while some remaining doesn't. > > Convert notices on remaining files to SPDX identifier. While at it, > also move SPDX identifier for drivers/watchdog/rtd119x_wdt.c to the > top of file (as in other files). > > Cc: Ray Lehtiniemi <rayl@mail.com> > Cc: Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it> > Cc: Andrey Panin <pazke@donpac.ru> > Cc: Oleg Drokin <green@crimea.edu> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> > Cc: Jonas Jensen <jonas.jensen@gmail.com> > Cc: Sylver Bruneau <sylver.bruneau@googlemail.com> > Cc: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@lsi.com> > Cc: Denis Turischev <denis@compulab.co.il> > Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> > Cc: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com> > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com> > Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> > --- [...] > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/rtd119x_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/rtd119x_wdt.c > index 95c8d7abce42e6..984905695dde51 100644 > --- a/drivers/watchdog/rtd119x_wdt.c > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/rtd119x_wdt.c > @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > /* > * Realtek RTD129x watchdog > * > * Copyright (c) 2017 Andreas Färber > * > - * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > */ > > #include <linux/bitops.h> Acked-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de> # for RTD119x Thanks, Andreas
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 6:07 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > diff --git a/fs/udf/ecma_167.h b/fs/udf/ecma_167.h > index de17a97e866742..b2b5bca45758df 100644 > --- a/fs/udf/ecma_167.h > +++ b/fs/udf/ecma_167.h > @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause OR GPL-1.0+ */ > /* > * ecma_167.h > * > @@ -8,29 +9,6 @@ > * Copyright (c) 2017-2019 Pali Rohár <pali@kernel.org> > * All rights reserved. > * > - * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without > - * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions > - * are met: > - * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright > - * notice, this list of conditions, and the following disclaimer, > - * without modification. > - * 2. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products > - * derived from this software without specific prior written permission. > - * > - * Alternatively, this software may be distributed under the terms of the > - * GNU Public License ("GPL"). > - * > - * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND > - * ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE > - * IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE > - * ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR > - * ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL > - * DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS > - * OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) > - * HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT > - * LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY > - * OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF > - * SUCH DAMAGE. > */ This is not BSD-2-Clause. Ignoring the interior statement about the GPL, I think the closest SPDX identifier might be https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-Source-Code.html but it doesn't quite match. > diff --git a/fs/udf/osta_udf.h b/fs/udf/osta_udf.h > index 157de0ec0cd530..6c09a4cb46f4a7 100644 > --- a/fs/udf/osta_udf.h > +++ b/fs/udf/osta_udf.h > @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause OR GPL-1.0+ */ > /* > * osta_udf.h > * > @@ -8,29 +9,6 @@ > * Copyright (c) 2017-2019 Pali Rohár <pali@kernel.org> > * All rights reserved. > * > - * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without > - * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions > - * are met: > - * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright > - * notice, this list of conditions, and the following disclaimer, > - * without modification. > - * 2. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products > - * derived from this software without specific prior written permission. > - * > - * Alternatively, this software may be distributed under the terms of the > - * GNU Public License ("GPL"). > - * > - * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND > - * ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE > - * IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE > - * ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR > - * ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL > - * DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS > - * OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) > - * HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT > - * LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY > - * OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF > - * SUCH DAMAGE. > */ Same comment - this is not BSD-2-Clause. > diff --git a/fs/udf/udftime.c b/fs/udf/udftime.c > index fce4ad976c8c29..d0fce5348fd3f3 100644 > --- a/fs/udf/udftime.c > +++ b/fs/udf/udftime.c > @@ -1,21 +1,4 @@ > -/* Copyright (C) 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > - This file is part of the GNU C Library. > - Contributed by Paul Eggert (eggert@twinsun.com). > - > - The GNU C Library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > - modify it under the terms of the GNU Library General Public License as > - published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the > - License, or (at your option) any later version. > - > - The GNU C Library 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 > - Library General Public License for more details. > - > - You should have received a copy of the GNU Library General Public > - License along with the GNU C Library; see the file COPYING.LIB. If not, > - write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, > - Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA. */ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only Shouldn't this be // SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.0-or-later ? (or are you implicitly using the obscure LGPLv2.x section ... 3 mechanism?) Richard
On 5/12/23 18:23, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > I'm glad to take these types of changes through the SPDX tree, but > please break them up into smaller changes that show the justification > for each type of change in each subsystem, so that we can evaluate them > on an individual basis. As you did here, you are lumping things > together only by the existance of the file in the tree, not by the > logical type of change happening, which isn't ok. > > Also, you can send them as subsystem-specific series, so as to not have > to cross-post all of the changes all over the place. I doubt the drm > developers care about ethernet driver license issues :) > OK, thanks!
On Friday 12 May 2023 17:06:20 Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > diff --git a/fs/udf/udftime.c b/fs/udf/udftime.c > index fce4ad976c8c29..d0fce5348fd3f3 100644 > --- a/fs/udf/udftime.c > +++ b/fs/udf/udftime.c > @@ -1,21 +1,4 @@ > -/* Copyright (C) 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > - This file is part of the GNU C Library. > - Contributed by Paul Eggert (eggert@twinsun.com). > - > - The GNU C Library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > - modify it under the terms of the GNU Library General Public License as > - published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the > - License, or (at your option) any later version. > - > - The GNU C Library 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 > - Library General Public License for more details. > - > - You should have received a copy of the GNU Library General Public > - License along with the GNU C Library; see the file COPYING.LIB. If not, > - write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, > - Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA. */ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > > /* > * dgb 10/02/98: ripped this from glibc source to help convert timestamps Please, dot not do this. It is really rude to people who worked on it in past (even if they do not care about this particular file anymore) as technically they still have ownership of this code / file. And such change never remove their ownership or copyright in most countries.
On 5/12/23 19:46, Richard Fontana wrote: > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 6:07 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c >> index 504be461f992a9..822bf8905bf3ce 100644 >> --- a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c >> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c >> @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0+ >> /* >> * Watchdog driver for SiByte SB1 SoCs >> * >> @@ -38,10 +39,6 @@ >> * (c) Copyright 1996 Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, >> * All Rights Reserved. >> * >> - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or >> - * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License >> - * version 1 or 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation. > > Shouldn't this be > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0 OR GPL-2.0 > (or in current SPDX notation GPL-1.0-only OR GPL-2.0-only) ? > Nope, as it will fail spdxcheck.py. Also, SPDX specification [1] doesn't have negation operator (NOT), thus the licensing requirement on the above notice can't be expressed reliably in SPDX here. [1]: https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2.3/SPDX-license-expressions/
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 6:53 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 5/12/23 19:46, Richard Fontana wrote: > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 6:07 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > >> index 504be461f992a9..822bf8905bf3ce 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > >> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > >> @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ > >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0+ > >> /* > >> * Watchdog driver for SiByte SB1 SoCs > >> * > >> @@ -38,10 +39,6 @@ > >> * (c) Copyright 1996 Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, > >> * All Rights Reserved. > >> * > >> - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > >> - * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License > >> - * version 1 or 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation. > > > > Shouldn't this be > > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0 OR GPL-2.0 > > (or in current SPDX notation GPL-1.0-only OR GPL-2.0-only) ? > > > > Nope, as it will fail spdxcheck.py. Also, SPDX specification [1] > doesn't have negation operator (NOT), thus the licensing requirement > on the above notice can't be expressed reliably in SPDX here. > > [1]: https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2.3/SPDX-license-expressions/ The GPL identifiers in recent versions of SPDX include an `-only` and an `-or-later` variant. So I don't see why you can't represent it as `GPL-1.0-only OR GPL-2.0-only`. From what I understand the kernel requires/prefers use of the earlier approach to GPL identifiers (which was better in my opinion) under which `GPL-1.0 OR GPL-2.0` would at least be semantically similar. I don't see why you need a negation operator in this case. You have other patches where you used the `-only` identifiers. Richard
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 09:43:39AM -0400, Richard Fontana wrote: > On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 6:53 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 5/12/23 19:46, Richard Fontana wrote: > > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 6:07 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > > >> index 504be461f992a9..822bf8905bf3ce 100644 > > >> --- a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > > >> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > > >> @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ > > >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0+ > > >> /* > > >> * Watchdog driver for SiByte SB1 SoCs > > >> * > > >> @@ -38,10 +39,6 @@ > > >> * (c) Copyright 1996 Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, > > >> * All Rights Reserved. > > >> * > > >> - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > > >> - * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License > > >> - * version 1 or 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation. > > > > > > Shouldn't this be > > > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0 OR GPL-2.0 > > > (or in current SPDX notation GPL-1.0-only OR GPL-2.0-only) ? > > > > > > > Nope, as it will fail spdxcheck.py. Also, SPDX specification [1] > > doesn't have negation operator (NOT), thus the licensing requirement > > on the above notice can't be expressed reliably in SPDX here. > > > > [1]: https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2.3/SPDX-license-expressions/ > > The GPL identifiers in recent versions of SPDX include an `-only` and > an `-or-later` variant. But Linux does not use the newer versions of SPDX given that we started the conversion before the "-only" variant came out. Let's stick with the original one please before worrying about converting to a newer version of SPDX and mixing things up. thanks, greg k-h
On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 12:07:28AM +0900, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 09:43:39AM -0400, Richard Fontana wrote: > > On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 6:53 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 5/12/23 19:46, Richard Fontana wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 6:07 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > > > >> index 504be461f992a9..822bf8905bf3ce 100644 > > > >> --- a/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > > > >> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/sb_wdog.c > > > >> @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ > > > >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0+ > > > >> /* > > > >> * Watchdog driver for SiByte SB1 SoCs > > > >> * > > > >> @@ -38,10 +39,6 @@ > > > >> * (c) Copyright 1996 Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, > > > >> * All Rights Reserved. > > > >> * > > > >> - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > > > >> - * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License > > > >> - * version 1 or 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation. > > > > > > > > Shouldn't this be > > > > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0 OR GPL-2.0 > > > > (or in current SPDX notation GPL-1.0-only OR GPL-2.0-only) ? > > > > > > > > > > Nope, as it will fail spdxcheck.py. Also, SPDX specification [1] > > > doesn't have negation operator (NOT), thus the licensing requirement > > > on the above notice can't be expressed reliably in SPDX here. > > > > > > [1]: https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2.3/SPDX-license-expressions/ > > > > The GPL identifiers in recent versions of SPDX include an `-only` and > > an `-or-later` variant. > > But Linux does not use the newer versions of SPDX given that we started > the conversion before the "-only" variant came out. Let's stick with > the original one please before worrying about converting to a newer > version of SPDX and mixing things up. > Either case I'd prefer to have no conversion if there is no means to express the original license (ie GPL-1.0 or GPL-2.0 and nothing else) in acceptable SPDX form. Thanks, Guenter