[cip-dev] [PATCH 4.4.y 05/52] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Add r8a77470 PFC support
pavel at denx.de
Sun May 19 20:22:16 UTC 2019
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a77470.c
> > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,2368 @@
> > > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > > > +/*
> > > > > + * R8A77470 processor support - PFC hardware block.
> > > > > + *
> > > >
> > > > SPDX here, good. But this one is GPL-2.0, and the other one was
> > > > GPL-2.0+. Is that difference intentional?
> > >
> > > What other SPDX header are you referring to?
> > I'm refering to
> > [PATCH 4.4.y 04/52] ARM: shmobile: r8a77470: Add clock index macros
> > for DT sources
> > That one has GPL-2.0+:
> Thank you for looking into this.
> I am not a license expert, but this one (and other similar files) probably need fixing.
Well, there's no "need" to fix anything. GPL-2.0+ is compatible with
GPL-2.0. And kernel is not likely to be released with GPL-3, so this
is mostly academic.
Normally, company lawyers are quite sensitive about this. If your
lawyers are not, consider yourself lucky ;-).
> I think using GPL-2.0+ with:
> was the wrong call, what do you think?
It really depends on your company policies. I believe GPL-3 is better
license than GPL-2.0, so I normally prefer GPL-2.0+, but... that's my
personal preference... and as kernel is not going to move to GPL-3 it
is really not important. There's no right or wrong, it all depends on
your company policies/lawyers.
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the cip-dev