Re: [PATCH 1/4] selftests: add tests_sysfs module

[Luis Chamberlain]

On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 06:46:46AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 12:02:30PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 07:21:12AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 10:05:40PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,953 @@
> > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * sysfs test driver
> > > > + *
> > > > + * Copyright (C) 2021 Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > + *
> > > > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
> > > > + * under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free
> > > > + * Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or at your option any
> > > > + * later version; or, when distributed separately from the Linux kernel or
> > > > + * when incorporated into other software packages, subject to the following
> > > > + * license:
> > > 
> > > This boilerplate should not be here, only the spdx line is needed.
> > 
> > As per Documentation/process/license-rules.rst we use the SPDX license
> > tag for the license that applies but it also states about dual
> > licensing:
> > 
> > "Aside from that, individual files can be provided under a dual license,         
> > e.g. one of the compatible GPL variants and alternatively under a               
> > permissive license like BSD, MIT etc."
> > 
> > Let me know if things should change somehow here to clarify this better.
> 
> The spdx line is not matching the actual license for the file, which is
> wrong.

We don't have spdx license tag yet for copyleft-next, and although
when using dual gplv2 or copyleft-next gplv2 applies I did fail to see
can use spdx for dual licensing such as:

# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later OR BSD-2-Clause

> And "copyright-left" is not a valid license according to our list of
> valid licenses in the LICENSES directory, so please do not add it to
> kernel code when it is obviously not needed.

You mean copyleft-next. Yes I'd have to add that. Given that we already
have two test drivers with that license I'll go ahead and add that.

> And given that this is directly interacting with sysfs, which is
> GPLv2-only, trying to claim a different license on the code that tests
> it is going to be a total mess for any lawyer who wants to look into
> this.  Just keep it simple please.

The faul injection code I added follows the exact license for sysfs. The
only interaction with the test_sysfs and sysfs is an exported symbol
for a completion structure. The other dual gpl OR copyleft-next test
drivers already present in the kernel also use exported symbols too, so
I see nothing new here.

  Luis