Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754471AbaLVLhy (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Dec 2014 06:37:54 -0500 Received: from vm1.sequanux.org ([188.165.36.56]:43911 "EHLO vm1.sequanux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751299AbaLVLhw (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Dec 2014 06:37:52 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 493 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2014 06:37:51 EST Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2014 12:29:33 +0100 From: Simon Guinot To: Jason Cooper Cc: Lior Amsalem , Andrew Lunn , Heikki Krogerus , Ryan Press , Nadav Haklai , Greg Ungerer , Benoit Masson , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Tawfik Bayouk , Ezequiel Garcia , Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= , Sebastian Hesselbarth , "klightspeed @ killerwolves . net" , Nobuhiro Iwamatsu , Arnaud Ebalard , Gregory CLEMENT , Nobuhiro Iwamatsu , Marcin Wojtas , Florian Fainelli , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Petazzoni , Simon Baatz , Philipp Zabel , Willy Tarreau Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/27] ARM: mvebu: armada-*: Relicense the device tree under GPLv2+/X11 Message-ID: <20141222112933.GK19261@kw.sim.vm.gnt> References: <54930BBC.4060602@free-electrons.com> <20141218191528.GY967@titan.lakedaemon.net> <549437DD.7040602@free-electrons.com> <20141219160230.GZ967@titan.lakedaemon.net> <54944DAC.1000709@free-electrons.com> <20141219170328.GA967@titan.lakedaemon.net> <54945C5C.2080801@free-electrons.com> <20141219174300.GB967@titan.lakedaemon.net> <20141219181616.GG19261@kw.sim.vm.gnt> <20141221235000.GC28117@titan.lakedaemon.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="CQDko/0aYvuiEzgn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141221235000.GC28117@titan.lakedaemon.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --CQDko/0aYvuiEzgn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 06:50:00PM -0500, Jason Cooper wrote: > On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 07:16:16PM +0100, Simon Guinot wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 12:43:00PM -0500, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 06:11:56PM +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wrote: > > > > On 19/12/2014 18:03, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 05:09:16PM +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wrote: > > > > >> On 19/12/2014 17:02, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > > >>> On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 03:36:13PM +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wrote: > > > > >>>> On 18/12/2014 20:15, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 06:15:40PM +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wro= te: > > > > >>>>> ... > > > > >>>>>> Jason at the end it seems you didn't ack or nack the patches= were you > > > > >>>>>> were CC. You expressed some concerns about the GPLv2+ move b= ut I don't know > > > > >>>>>> if it is something that prevents you to give your acked-by. > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> Oops. :) I figured my S-o-B when applying would be sufficie= nt. That > > > > >>>>> decision was before we decided on Andrew applying patches thi= s time > > > > >>>>> around... > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> For all my dts{i} contributions: > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> Acked-by: Jason Cooper > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Thanks :) > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> Due to all the merge commits over time and whatnot, it's prob= ably best > > > > >>>>> to put my Ack on all the patches in this series... > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> OK no problem. By the way, I take care of collecting all the a= cked-by and > > > > >>>> once it will be done I will either sent the updated patch set = with all the > > > > >>>> acked-by or maybe just I will create a branch to pull if it is= easier to handle. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Ok, that'll be up to Andrew. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Once we have the last few stragglers, and assuming there are no= more > > > > >>> NAKs, here's what I'd like to do: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Regrettably, we'll have to revert Simon's dts contributions. I= say > > > > >> > > > > >> You missed the email he sent yesterday, finally Simon changed hi= s mind > > > > >> and gave his acked-by. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Indeed, that was for the oneliner change in the armada-370-xp.dts= i file. > > > > > I got a bit ahead of myself, but I'm looking towards kirkwood, or= ion5x, > > > > > dove, which brings up: > > > > >=20 > > > > > 18ba7e4fe51d ARM: Kirkwood: add DT support for d2 Network v2 > > > > > 2d4cd2cafaea ARM: Kirkwood: allow to use netxbig DTSI for d2net_v= 2 DTS > > > > > a96cc303e42a ARM: mvebu: update the SATA compatible string for Ar= mada 370/XP > > > > > d3dde4df4483 ARM: Kirkwood: update Network Space Mini v2 descript= ion > > > > > 98d4f2acb91a ARM: Kirkwood: DT board setup for CloudBox > > > > > 4ea931e07d77 ARM: Kirkwood: fix ns2 gpios by converting to pinctrl > > > > > 7f9871d9d30f ARM: kirkwood: DT board setup for Network Space Mini= v2 > > > > > ca7d94524ab3 ARM: kirkwood: DT board setup for Network Space Lite= v2 > > > > > ecee1e47ab42 ARM: kirkwood: DT board setup for Network Space v2 a= nd parents > > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > OK I understand your concern now. About dove and kirkwood, did you = notice that > > > > some files didn't have any license? > > >=20 > > > Yes. > > >=20 > > > > Especially none of the dove files have a license. > > >=20 > > > Yes, we'll cross that bridge when we get there. I suspect it then fa= lls > > > under the over-arching license of the project. Regardless, we'll sti= ll > > > need Acks from all contributors. > >=20 > > Hi Jason, > >=20 > > What is the problem with keeping the LaCie DTS files under GPLv2+ only ? >=20 > Converting armada-* to dual license is just a small part of the > overarching effort to convert *all* the devicetree files to dual > license. So, eventually, we'll be doing the same with kirkwood, dove > and orion5x dts{i} files. Perhaps even during this merge window. >=20 > In the long term, we're attempting to provide one neutral place [1] for > the bootloaders and kernels to pull devicetrees from and contribute > changes back to. OK, let's see if I understand correctly. If I don't agree with the GPLv2+/x11 relicensing, then support for almost all the LaCie boards will be removed from the Linux kernel (maybe during the next merge window) ? Is that correct ? Since all the LaCie boards DTS are at least based on my work (except for the Orion ED Mini v2), I think there is 12 files concerned here. See the command output: grep -l lacie *.dts | wc -l. The oldest of this boards have been supported by the Linux kernel since the 2.6.32 release. Also some of this boards are still widely used... You know, it is quite a statement you are sending here: The GPLv2+ licences are not good enough to get an ARM-based board supported by the Linux kernel, while it has always been the case until now. Are all the maintainers SoC, ARM SoC, ARM and Linux well aligned with that ? Is there any way we can keep the LaCie DTS files licenced under GPLv2+ _and_ still distributed with the others. Anyone would be free to choose to use them (or not), in respect of the licence terms. Simon --CQDko/0aYvuiEzgn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlSYAJ0ACgkQgtp0PDeOcDojBwCgkd7a/NHUbNcQsgLJf0Di3FIA E5gAn3n0JOD+YOAuf9trB33GqmTy9jf2 =ETFE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --CQDko/0aYvuiEzgn-- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/