From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B834C4338F for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:37:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB7060FC2 for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:37:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234722AbhG1LhF (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 07:37:05 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:57622 "EHLO mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231631AbhG1LhD (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 07:37:03 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0127361.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 16SBZLlc142223; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 07:37:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=JpvkP/sSx0+CicPZme9FwNAfcQuXADAEVl5JkdlP+y8=; b=YYRrYKqu55UzWN9g2r/udWLhqD91zs/s5oc/T8zvig8XXt+eBaRBMhibarMZcYV1P+eW kDpIv+CRroXStuCcyyJowQ2+CdMCbpn0RpjyYBccYSFAfqOpgEezmZNcQeISC7Y1mP3u jMQBuB2jbud2yGqR1SSBFPm70U3YifBp4qVjN4MiDqLIuW/ELMlTGjYXjcKakuzwxIjK 2rViZhdcZXdvThXy74ZlgkKpI9UJaEF+q7Mb2QJWu+qQ8ZcAddkxn63B9ugqaH4XWkmm 1F7yYSEy23sT/Vv4hQVg0XdMx/0Lm2Lr6tdLePIWZ4nCIA7GIwLoCA51YPyPSc0Wp3UO YQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3a36g88495-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 07:36:59 -0400 Received: from m0127361.ppops.net (m0127361.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 16SBZUXx143018; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 07:36:58 -0400 Received: from ppma06fra.de.ibm.com (48.49.7a9f.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [159.122.73.72]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3a36g8841y-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 07:36:58 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma06fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma06fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 16SBSfhV031628; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:36:54 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay13.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.198]) by ppma06fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3a235kgntg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:36:53 +0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 16SBapLs27263350 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:36:51 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DFFF4203F; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:36:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D847642047; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:36:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.145.21.74]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:36:50 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 1/3] s390x: Add SPDX and header comments for s390x/* and lib/s390x/* To: Thomas Huth , Claudio Imbrenda Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, david@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com References: <20210728101328.51646-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> <20210728101328.51646-2-frankja@linux.ibm.com> <20210728123221.7ca90b35@p-imbrenda> From: Janosch Frank Message-ID: <2e391a1a-54d4-8713-4a93-104a6b4cfaf1@linux.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 13:36:50 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: LF6L63Ogvb2FfHfGhZYvyj3i20Afv0Pc X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: G65mkG3bDvg6WlUnehmw0MC89cSMrysO X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391,18.0.790 definitions=2021-07-28_07:2021-07-27,2021-07-28 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2107140000 definitions=main-2107280064 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org On 7/28/21 12:36 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 28/07/2021 12.32, Claudio Imbrenda wrote: >> On Wed, 28 Jul 2021 10:13:26 +0000 >> Janosch Frank wrote: >> >>> Seems like I missed adding them. >>> >>> The s390x/sieve.c one is a bit of a head scratcher since it came with >>> the first commit but I assume it's lpgl2-only since that's what the >>> COPYRIGHT file said then. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank >>> --- >>> lib/s390x/uv.c | 9 +++++++++ >>> s390x/mvpg-sie.c | 9 +++++++++ >>> s390x/sie.c | 10 ++++++++++ >>> x86/sieve.c | 5 +++++ >>> 4 files changed, 33 insertions(+) > [...] >>> diff --git a/x86/sieve.c b/x86/sieve.c >>> index 8150f2d9..b89d5f80 100644 >>> --- a/x86/sieve.c >>> +++ b/x86/sieve.c >>> @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ >>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.0-only */ >> >> do you really need to fix something in the x86 directory? (even though >> it is also used on other archs) > > I just realized that s390x/sieve.c is just a symlink, not a copy of the file :-) You're not the only one... > >> maybe you can split out this as a separate patch, so s390x stuff is >> more self contained, and others can then discuss the sieve.c patch >> separately if needed? > > That might make sense, indeed. Yup will do > > Thomas >