Re: [PATCH v2 5/8] Input: cros_ec_keyb - Switch to SPDX identifier.

[Enric Balletbo i Serra]

Hi Grek,

On 25/06/18 03:57, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 08:14:24PM +0200, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>> Hi Fabio,
>>
>> On 05/06/18 20:04, Fabio Estevam wrote:
>>> Hi Enric,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Enric Balletbo i Serra
>>> <enric.balletbo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Adopt the SPDX license identifier headers to ease license compliance
>>>> management.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>> - [6/9] Do not remove last paragraph.
>>>>
>>>>  drivers/input/keyboard/cros_ec_keyb.c | 34 ++++++++++-----------------
>>>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/cros_ec_keyb.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/cros_ec_keyb.c
>>>> index 79eb29550c34..91b2839c12df 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/input/keyboard/cros_ec_keyb.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/cros_ec_keyb.c
>>>> @@ -1,25 +1,15 @@
>>>> -/*
>>>> - * ChromeOS EC keyboard driver
>>>> - *
>>>> - * Copyright (C) 2012 Google, Inc
>>>> - *
>>>> - * This software is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public
>>>> - * License version 2, as published by the Free Software Foundation, and
>>>
>>> Original text says GPL-2.0...
>>>
>>>> - * may be copied, distributed, and modified under those terms.
>>>> - *
>>>> - * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>>>> - * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>>>> - * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>>>> - * GNU General Public License for more details.
>>>> - *
>>>> - * This driver uses the Chrome OS EC byte-level message-based protocol for
>>>> - * communicating the keyboard state (which keys are pressed) from a keyboard EC
>>>> - * to the AP over some bus (such as i2c, lpc, spi).  The EC does debouncing,
>>>> - * but everything else (including deghosting) is done here.  The main
>>>> - * motivation for this is to keep the EC firmware as simple as possible, since
>>>> - * it cannot be easily upgraded and EC flash/IRAM space is relatively
>>>> - * expensive.
>>>> - */
>>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
>>>
>>> but here you add a GPL-2.0+ type.
>>>
>>
>> Right, but the module license is set to GPL which means GNU Public License v2 or
>> later, see [1]. So, there is a mismatch. In such cases I assumed GPL-2.0+ as the
>> default. These mismatches are common so I think that should be fine for the
>> authors, if someone is disagree just let me know and I will change.
> 
> NO!
> 
> The license text is what you need to follow as almost everyone gets the
> MODULE_LICENSE() stuff wrong.  You can not follow the MODULE_LICENSE
> marking for determining GPLv2 vs. GPLv2+ at this point in time.  After
> we get the SPDX stuff all cleaned up then we can go and fix up the
> MODULE_LICENSE mismatch.
> 
> So again, always defer to the license text in the file, NOT the
> MODULE_LICENSE() marking.
> 

Many thanks for your feedback, Dmitry already told me that I was doing wrong
this and I sent another version following the license text, so this patchset was
superseded for v3 [1].

[1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/925906/

Thanks,
 Enric

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
>