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://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/license-rules.html#kernel-licensing
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
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/[email protected]/
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
Quoting Sam Shih (2022-01-10 04:12:57)
> 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/[email protected]/
>
> 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?
>
Please send a followup to fix it.