Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 21 Nov 2019 12:50:13 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Toke =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= <thoiland@redhat.com>
Cc:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
        linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] net: WireGuard secure network tunnel
Message-ID: <20191121115013.GA427938@kroah.com>
References: <20191120203538.199367-1-Jason@zx2c4.com>
 <877e3t8qv7.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <877e3t8qv7.fsf@toke.dk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21)
Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 11:29:16AM +0100, Toke H?iland-J?rgensen wrote:
> "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com> writes:
> 
> > RFC Note:
> >   This is a RFC for folks who want to play with this early, because
> >   Herbert's cryptodev-2.6 tree hasn't yet made it into net-next. I'll
> >   repost this as a v1 (possibly with feedback incorporated) once the
> >   various trees are in the right place. This compiles on top of the
> >   Frankenzinc patchset from Ard, though it hasn't yet received suitable
> >   testing there for me to call it v1 just yet. Preliminary testing with
> >   the usual netns.sh test suite on x86 indicates it's at least mostly
> >   functional, but I'll be giving things further scrutiny in the days to
> >   come.
> 
> Hi Jason
> 
> Great to see this! Just a few small comments for now:
> 
> > +/*
> > + * Copyright (C) 2015-2019 Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>. All Rights Reserved.
> > + */
> 
> Could you please get rid of the "All Rights Reserved" (here, and
> everywhere else)? All rights are *not* reserved: this is licensed under
> the GPL. Besides, that phrase is in general dubious at best:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_rights_reserved

Don't take legal questions/advice on a developer mailing list :)

This text is fine as-is, please consult your RedHat lawyers for why that
is so.

And if RedHat does have issues with this, have them please clean up the
instances in the kernel where they have this same text before asking
anyone else to do so.

thanks,

greg k-h