On 7/5/22 5:47 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 29 Jun 2022 at 10:58, teik.heng.chong@intel.com wrote:
From: Teik Heng Chong teik.heng.chong@intel.com
All the source code of clk-mem-n5x.c and clk-n5x.c are from Intel, update the license to use both GPL2.0 and BSD-3 Clause because this copy of code may used for open source and internal project.
Signed-off-by: Teik Heng Chong teik.heng.chong@intel.com
drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.c | 4 ++-- drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.h | 4 ++-- drivers/clk/altera/clk-n5x.c | 4 ++-- drivers/clk/altera/clk-n5x.h | 4 ++-- 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.c b/drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.c index ca44998641..9bbe2cd0ca 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.c +++ b/drivers/clk/altera/clk-mem-n5x.c @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ -// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause
+Tom Rini
OR is not a license so I think you should drop that word.
OR is valid in SPDX license identifier expressions
https://spdx.dev/spdx-specification-21-web-version/#h.jxpfx0ykyb60
Also U-Boot is GPL so seems strange to use a different license for these files. If it was wrong initially, perhaps add a 'Fixes' tag?
As used in U-Boot, this effectively is an AND (since this code will be linked with GPL code). As stated in the commit message, presumably this is to allow use in other (BSD-licensed) projects. Tom, do we generally allow this sort of thing? Is it OK for someone to come along later and change the license back (e.g. make it GPL-only again)?
I *would* like to see a RB or AB from Siew Chin Lim, since he is the original author of this code, but since it is copyright Intel I suppose it is fine to leave him out...
--Sean