Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 20 May 2020 07:32:45 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>
Cc:     Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org,
        wufan@codeaurora.org, pratanan@codeaurora.org,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Qualcomm Cloud AI 100 driver
Message-ID: <20200520053245.GA2154372@kroah.com>
References: <1589465266-20056-1-git-send-email-jhugo@codeaurora.org>
 <CAPM=9txXskVu_yD3DNuR0HgSUsE2v1Pv98dm=AHGvv_z2XKTAQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <93238096-5861-c140-b94f-6137977c3d65@codeaurora.org>
 <20200519174120.GC1158284@kroah.com>
 <ce0e69ef-116c-df95-c136-d4714e02e96e@codeaurora.org>
 <20200519181256.GA1215993@kroah.com>
 <f7ea166b-7ccb-22e2-7db0-bfd255ba0134@codeaurora.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f7ea166b-7ccb-22e2-7db0-bfd255ba0134@codeaurora.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 12:26:01PM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> On 5/19/2020 12:12 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > Especially given the copyright owner of this code, that would be just
> > > > crazy and foolish to not have open userspace code as well.  Firmware
> > > > would also be wonderful as well, go poke your lawyers about derivative
> > > > work issues and the like for fun conversations :)
> > > 
> > > Those are the kind of conversations I try to avoid  :)
> > 
> > Sounds like you are going to now have to have them, have fun!
> 
> Honestly, I fail to see where you think there is a derivative work, so, I'm
> not really sure what discussions I need to revisit with our lawyers.

Given that we are not lawyers, why don't we leave those types of
discussions up to the lawyers, and not depend on people like me and you
for that?  :)

If your lawyers think that the code division is fine as-is, that's
great, I'd be glad to review it if they add their signed-off-by: on it
verifying that the api divide is approved by them.

thanks!

greg k-h