Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751381AbeAPPNO (ORCPT + 1 other); Tue, 16 Jan 2018 10:13:14 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:59220 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751295AbeAPPNM (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jan 2018 10:13:12 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:13:12 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Bogdan Purcareata Cc: laurentiu.tudor@nxp.com, ruxandra.radulescu@nxp.com, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, robh@kernel.org, stuyoder@gmail.com, arnd@arndb.de, marc.zyngier@arm.com, roy.pledge@nxp.com, ioana.ciornei@nxp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, horia.geanta@nxp.com, nipun.gupta@nxp.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jason@lakedaemon.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] staging: fsl-mc: Add SPDX license identifiers Message-ID: <20180116151312.GA1174@kroah.com> References: <1516108750-24938-1-git-send-email-bogdan.purcareata@nxp.com> <1516108750-24938-4-git-send-email-bogdan.purcareata@nxp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1516108750-24938-4-git-send-email-bogdan.purcareata@nxp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 03:19:05PM +0200, Bogdan Purcareata wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/bus/dpbp-cmd.h b/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/bus/dpbp-cmd.h > index 5904836..1ac8ec6 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/bus/dpbp-cmd.h > +++ b/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/bus/dpbp-cmd.h > @@ -1,33 +1,8 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR BSD-3-Clause) */ Hm, I don't think you want to do that. How can a Linux driver subsytem that wraps calls to the kernel's driver core (which are GPL-only), be accessed by BSD-3 code? If I didn't know any better, I would think you were trying to create a "GPL Condom" here :) Anyway, why all of the BSD-3 stuff here? That makes no sense for kernel code at all, and this is a relicensing of the file, have you gotten legal approval of everyone that has modified the file while it was under the GPL-v2 only text to be able to change it to BSD-3 as well? Careful, this is a _VERY_ tricky thing to do right. I need a signed-off-by on this type of patch from your legal council to ensure that they know exactly what you are doing, and have reviewed it properly, before I can take it. Hint, stick to the existing license in the files, it makes more sense, you are not going to be taking this code out of Linux and putting it anywhere. thanks, greg k-h