Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp13865imm; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 06:55:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPzSc0C9AXJTRLg7yRrOcZtJZ/IlIDyUxREq/kfrU/wxSCHCsgGeFYISYLJSC/IWhZZo77g7 X-Received: by 2002:a63:6c05:: with SMTP id h5-v6mr6639929pgc.367.1533909340156; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 06:55:40 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1533909340; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=aIXMJSLeS3ljon9ZMuvtE/G7AQI6W1DBLIxhqjTb5qpjICEVE8w8EPIn/Cqz9Kk5ck yw+mP8N6B8yqU7VWuNkfcGQdUvsSpohuF3L77PEV3GEiIPpo47LeSfKT3pXFbK49F1bG 2z7gZNXVGn6C0V9mpn/5B2YyeIkwOrI4iytiH89mV8lraFxVetX3RNFmT4VElV4Ghpyq L3qqNUJhIj1LRVa6Ez7nhcKQubUJyDMvHpx5W76qA0IQjjOyKFcqwJCB3xVXAohI+I+G YIBLLiq/Ep5l/AJ3bMHpKNNL6Smns8g5qqtvRiN0sw9DB7OHdY10ohcM9b1w/4Juh+EE 5+XQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :organization:references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from :date:arc-authentication-results; bh=dnPSWuNpqdLpJY24JX3cSCOHyu8gvNsPtkVeWgE4PQE=; b=SpaPih+WF9rx7dnZRoF6punkwo0hPuLze5SSvTQ9AOKJeSGoZmhQOMeL7rB1GivEwm mPI0OoJzKpnJXOC+dA+QOyyks6zEsG+6a9uJ255jmeQj442kHQgxy8DncEwF9zYJU1/R M2PuQc9rAEq+JnMxW1vUVei5QP6+FjSmdlypJpWNDIGqKhPOC2xjN8ABZ7Ws+NT9kGGw A8p26eox50PxEIq7xBJm62Fxw6W6KkzyiGp86GeM0AwNRj9jXEtQc64TcoIp888TVWd6 Ela4tfz56MVOh5sLtrDLXuH6AiFnHStJySjrV2nf9oCi6pKb3AliG8rYyoFfSPld8Dcc M7bA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id l88-v6si10224759pfi.179.2018.08.10.06.55.20; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 06:55:39 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727872AbeHJP1m (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:27:42 -0400 Received: from ms.lwn.net ([45.79.88.28]:59368 "EHLO ms.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726379AbeHJP1m (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:27:42 -0400 Received: from lwn.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 90F0A9B0; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 12:57:53 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 06:57:52 -0600 From: Jonathan Corbet To: "Tobin C. Harding" Cc: Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , Alexei Starovoitov , "David S. Miller" , Kees Cook , Andy Lutomirski , Will Drewry , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] Convert filter.txt to RST Message-ID: <20180810065752.2ab5473d@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <20180810014636.GJ32374@eros> References: <20180809052328.27942-1-me@tobin.cc> <20180809060734.rtqqu4sexbwzuqmm@ast-mbp> <20180809072753.GF32374@eros> <80bdc251-9f57-602f-6536-b34651684bb7@iogearbox.net> <20180810014636.GJ32374@eros> Organization: LWN.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:46:36 +1000 "Tobin C. Harding" wrote: > Thanks for clarifying. My understanding is now; this is a case where > checkpatch is too verbose and we do not actually need to add a specific > license identifier to the documentation files (new or otherwise). They > get an implicit GPLv2. The objective actually is to have SPDX tags in all files in the kernel. That includes documentation, even though people, as always, care less about the docs than they do the code. As I understood it, the complaint with the tags you put in wasn't their existence, it was your putting GPLv2+ rather than straight GPLv2. In the absence of information to the contrary, you really have to assume the latter, since that's the overall license for the kernel. Thanks, jon