Remove the imprecise and sloppy:
"This files is licensed under the GPL."
license notice in the top level comment.
1) The file already contains a SPDX license identifier which clearly
states that the license of the file is GPL V2 only
2) The notice resolves to GPL v1 or later for scanners which is just
contrary to the intent of SPDX identifiers to provide clear and non
ambiguous license information. Aside of that the value add of this
notice is below zero,
Fixes: 6a5ac9846508 ("block: Make struct request_queue smaller for CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ZONED=n")
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <[email protected]>
Cc: Damien Le Moal <[email protected]>
Cc: Matias Bjorling <[email protected]>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
---
P.S.: This patch is part of a larger cleanup, but independent of other
patches and is intended to be picked up by the maintainer directly.
block/blk-mq-debugfs-zoned.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
--- a/block/blk-mq-debugfs-zoned.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq-debugfs-zoned.c
@@ -1,8 +1,6 @@
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
/*
* Copyright (C) 2017 Western Digital Corporation or its affiliates.
- *
- * This file is released under the GPL.
*/
#include <linux/blkdev.h>
On 1/17/19 3:14 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Remove the imprecise and sloppy:
>
> "This files is licensed under the GPL."
>
> license notice in the top level comment.
>
> 1) The file already contains a SPDX license identifier which clearly
> states that the license of the file is GPL V2 only
>
> 2) The notice resolves to GPL v1 or later for scanners which is just
> contrary to the intent of SPDX identifiers to provide clear and non
> ambiguous license information. Aside of that the value add of this
> notice is below zero,
My intent was to release this under GPL v2, hence:
Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <[email protected]>
On 1/17/19 4:14 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Remove the imprecise and sloppy:
>
> "This files is licensed under the GPL."
>
> license notice in the top level comment.
>
> 1) The file already contains a SPDX license identifier which clearly
> states that the license of the file is GPL V2 only
>
> 2) The notice resolves to GPL v1 or later for scanners which is just
> contrary to the intent of SPDX identifiers to provide clear and non
> ambiguous license information. Aside of that the value add of this
> notice is below zero,
Applied, thanks Thomas.
--
Jens Axboe