bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
@ 2021-09-23  0:05 luca.boccassi
  2021-09-23 10:41 ` Luca Boccassi
                   ` (5 more replies)
  0 siblings, 6 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: luca.boccassi @ 2021-09-23  0:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf
  Cc: bjorn.topel, jackmanb, jiong.wang, jakub.kicinski, ast, daniel,
	andrii, kafai, songliubraving, yhs, john.fastabend, kpsingh,
	daniel, fengc, joe, jbacik, Luca Boccassi

From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>

libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
samples are still GPL2-only.

Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example
it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd
tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h

Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:

1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")

Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
---
Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived
incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently
not possible.
Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping
moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:

https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html

The authors of this file according to git log are:

Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>

(excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)

All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the
above list of authors will be necessary.

One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both
libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus
it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could
be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue
we are currently facing.

 samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
--- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
+++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
 /* eBPF instruction mini library */
 #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
 #define __BPF_INSN_H
-- 
2.33.0


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-23  0:05 [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause luca.boccassi
@ 2021-09-23 10:41 ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-09-23 13:42   ` Quentin Monnet
  2021-09-27 14:07   ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-09-27 14:27 ` Luca Boccassi
                   ` (4 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Luca Boccassi @ 2021-09-23 10:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf
  Cc: bjorn, kuba, ast, daniel, andrii, kafai, songliubraving, yhs,
	john.fastabend, kpsingh, daniel, joe, jbacik

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3333 bytes --]

On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> 
> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
> samples are still GPL2-only.
> 
> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For
> example
> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the
> systemd
> tree:
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
> 
> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
> 
> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> ---
> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no
> perceived
> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is
> currently
> not possible.
> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are
> scoping
> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
> 
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
> 
> The authors of this file according to git log are:
> 
> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
> 
> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
> 
> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in
> the
> above list of authors will be necessary.
> 
> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files
> given both
> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger
> and thus
> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this
> header could
> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license
> incompatibility issue
> we are currently facing.
> 
>  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
>  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
>  #define __BPF_INSN_H

Got "address not found" for the following:

Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>

Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn
and Jakub.

I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address -
Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not
necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack
would cover both contributions?

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-23 10:41 ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-09-23 13:42   ` Quentin Monnet
  2021-09-23 14:10     ` Simon Horman
  2021-09-27 14:07   ` Luca Boccassi
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Quentin Monnet @ 2021-09-23 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Luca Boccassi, bpf
  Cc: bjorn, kuba, ast, daniel, andrii, kafai, songliubraving, yhs,
	john.fastabend, kpsingh, daniel, joe, jbacik, Simon Horman

2021-09-23 11:41 UTC+0100 ~ Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>>
>> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
>> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
>> samples are still GPL2-only.
>>
>> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For
>> example
>> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the
>> systemd
>> tree:
>> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
>>
>> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
>> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
>>
>> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
>> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>> ---
>> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no
>> perceived
>> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
>> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is
>> currently
>> not possible.
>> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are
>> scoping
>> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
>>
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
>>
>> The authors of this file according to git log are:
>>
>> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
>> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
>> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
>> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
>> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
>> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
>> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
>> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
>> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
>>
>> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
>>
>> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in
>> the
>> above list of authors will be necessary.
>>
>> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files
>> given both
>> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger
>> and thus
>> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this
>> header could
>> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license
>> incompatibility issue
>> we are currently facing.
>>
>>  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
>> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>>  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
>>  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
>>  #define __BPF_INSN_H
> 
> Got "address not found" for the following:
> 
> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
> 
> Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn
> and Jakub.
> 
> I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address -
> Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not
> necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack
> would cover both contributions?
> 

Hi Luca, I believe Simon can handle this for Netronome, I'm adding him
in copy.

Quentin

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-23 13:42   ` Quentin Monnet
@ 2021-09-23 14:10     ` Simon Horman
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2021-09-23 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Quentin Monnet
  Cc: Luca Boccassi, bpf, bjorn, kuba, ast, daniel, andrii, kafai,
	songliubraving, yhs, john.fastabend, kpsingh, daniel, joe,
	jbacik

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 02:42:39PM +0100, Quentin Monnet wrote:
> 2021-09-23 11:41 UTC+0100 ~ Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> > On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
> >> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> >>
> >> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
> >> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
> >> samples are still GPL2-only.
> >>
> >> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For
> >> example
> >> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the
> >> systemd
> >> tree:
> >> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
> >>
> >> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
> >> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
> >>
> >> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
> >> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> >> ---
> >> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no
> >> perceived
> >> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
> >> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is
> >> currently
> >> not possible.
> >> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are
> >> scoping
> >> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
> >>
> >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
> >>
> >> The authors of this file according to git log are:
> >>
> >> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> >> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> >> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
> >> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
> >> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> >> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
> >> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> >> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
> >> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
> >> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
> >>
> >> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
> >>
> >> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in
> >> the
> >> above list of authors will be necessary.
> >>
> >> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files
> >> given both
> >> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger
> >> and thus
> >> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this
> >> header could
> >> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license
> >> incompatibility issue
> >> we are currently facing.
> >>
> >>  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> >> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
> >> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> >> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> >> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
> >>  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
> >>  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
> >>  #define __BPF_INSN_H
> > 
> > Got "address not found" for the following:
> > 
> > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> > Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> > Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
> > 
> > Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn
> > and Jakub.
> > 
> > I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address -
> > Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not
> > necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack
> > would cover both contributions?
> > 
> 
> Hi Luca, I believe Simon can handle this for Netronome, I'm adding him
> in copy.

Yes, in the recent past we have handled a similar request like this:

Acked-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-23 10:41 ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-09-23 13:42   ` Quentin Monnet
@ 2021-09-27 14:07   ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-09-27 14:11     ` Daniel Mack
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Luca Boccassi @ 2021-09-27 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf
  Cc: bjorn, kuba, ast, daniel, andrii, kafai, songliubraving, yhs,
	john.fastabend, kpsingh, daniel, joe, jbacik

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3642 bytes --]

On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 11:41 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
> > From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> > 
> > libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
> > software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
> > samples are still GPL2-only.
> > 
> > Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For
> > example
> > it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the
> > systemd
> > tree:
> > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
> > 
> > Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
> > the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
> > 
> > 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
> > 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> > ---
> > Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no
> > perceived
> > incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
> > OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is
> > currently
> > not possible.
> > Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are
> > scoping
> > moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
> > 
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
> > 
> > The authors of this file according to git log are:
> > 
> > Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> > Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
> > Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
> > Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> > Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
> > Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> > Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
> > Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
> > Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
> > 
> > (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
> > 
> > All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in
> > the
> > above list of authors will be necessary.
> > 
> > One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files
> > given both
> > libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger
> > and thus
> > it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this
> > header could
> > be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license
> > incompatibility issue
> > we are currently facing.
> > 
> >  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> > index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
> > --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> > +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> > -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
> >  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
> >  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
> >  #define __BPF_INSN_H
> 
> Got "address not found" for the following:
> 
> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
> 
> Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn
> and Jakub.
> 
> I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address -
> Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not
> necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack
> would cover both contributions?

Gentle ping. We got ACKs from Netronome and Google so far (thanks!).

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-27 14:07   ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-09-27 14:11     ` Daniel Mack
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Mack @ 2021-09-27 14:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Luca Boccassi, bpf
  Cc: bjorn, kuba, ast, daniel, andrii, kafai, songliubraving, yhs,
	john.fastabend, kpsingh, joe, jbacik

On 9/27/21 4:07 PM, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 11:41 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>> On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
>>> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>>>
>>> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
>>> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
>>> samples are still GPL2-only.
>>>
>>> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For
>>> example
>>> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the
>>> systemd
>>> tree:
>>> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
>>>
>>> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
>>> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
>>>
>>> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
>>> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>>> ---
>>> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no
>>> perceived
>>> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
>>> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is
>>> currently
>>> not possible.
>>> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are
>>> scoping
>>> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
>>>
>>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
>>>
>>> The authors of this file according to git log are:
>>>
>>> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
>>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
>>> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
>>> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
>>> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
>>> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
>>> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
>>> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
>>> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
>>> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
>>>
>>> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
>>>
>>> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in
>>> the
>>> above list of authors will be necessary.
>>>
>>> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files
>>> given both
>>> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger
>>> and thus
>>> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this
>>> header could
>>> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license
>>> incompatibility issue
>>> we are currently facing.
>>>
>>>  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>>> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
>>> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>>> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>>> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>>>  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
>>>  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
>>>  #define __BPF_INSN_H
>>
>> Got "address not found" for the following:
>>
>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
>> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
>> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
>>
>> Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn
>> and Jakub.
>>
>> I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address -
>> Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not
>> necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack
>> would cover both contributions?
> 
> Gentle ping. We got ACKs from Netronome and Google so far (thanks!).
> 

For my bits:

Acked-by: Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>


Thanks,
Daniel


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-23  0:05 [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause luca.boccassi
  2021-09-23 10:41 ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-09-27 14:27 ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-09-27 14:39   ` Josef Bacik
  2021-09-28 15:44 ` Luca Boccassi
                   ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Luca Boccassi @ 2021-09-27 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf; +Cc: josef

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2845 bytes --]

On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> 
> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
> samples are still GPL2-only.
> 
> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example
> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd
> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
> 
> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
> 
> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> ---
> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived
> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently
> not possible.
> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping
> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
> 
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
> 
> The authors of this file according to git log are:
> 
> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
> 
> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
> 
> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the
> above list of authors will be necessary.
> 
> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both
> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus
> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could
> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue
> we are currently facing.
> 
>  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
>  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
>  #define __BPF_INSN_H

CC'ing Josef with a different address as requested.

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-27 14:27 ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-09-27 14:39   ` Josef Bacik
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Josef Bacik @ 2021-09-27 14:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Luca Boccassi, bpf

On 9/27/21 10:27 AM, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>>
>> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
>> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
>> samples are still GPL2-only.
>>
>> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example
>> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd
>> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
>>
>> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
>> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
>>
>> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
>> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>> ---
>> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived
>> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
>> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently
>> not possible.
>> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping
>> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
>>
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
>>
>> The authors of this file according to git log are:
>>
>> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
>> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
>> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
>> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
>> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
>> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
>> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
>> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
>> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
>>
>> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
>>
>> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the
>> above list of authors will be necessary.
>>
>> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both
>> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus
>> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could
>> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue
>> we are currently facing.
>>
>>   samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
>> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>>   /* eBPF instruction mini library */
>>   #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
>>   #define __BPF_INSN_H
> 
> CC'ing Josef with a different address as requested.
> 

Thanks, my @fb email gets mangled so I don't use it anymore.  You can add

Acked-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>

Josef

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-23  0:05 [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause luca.boccassi
  2021-09-23 10:41 ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-09-27 14:27 ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-09-28 15:44 ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-09-29 11:01   ` Björn Töpel
       [not found] ` <CA+i-1C3sjrwtskbSZzera7ANL8dTiVWMBwLRhe=+1Ft6NgfL=A@mail.gmail.com>
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Luca Boccassi @ 2021-09-28 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf; +Cc: joe, bjorn

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2874 bytes --]

On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> 
> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
> samples are still GPL2-only.
> 
> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example
> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd
> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
> 
> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
> 
> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> ---
> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived
> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently
> not possible.
> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping
> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
> 
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
> 
> The authors of this file according to git log are:
> 
> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
> 
> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
> 
> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the
> above list of authors will be necessary.
> 
> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both
> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus
> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could
> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue
> we are currently facing.
> 
>  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
>  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
>  #define __BPF_INSN_H

Gentle ping. Björn and Joe, would be great to hear from you on the
above. TIA!

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
       [not found] ` <CA+i-1C3sjrwtskbSZzera7ANL8dTiVWMBwLRhe=+1Ft6NgfL=A@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2021-09-28 19:09   ` Joe Stringer
       [not found]     ` <CAMOXUJ=gLLCDv0ZuEz77Qvepx9r0uTfy3J3phWuGPMQXsM1FGA@mail.gmail.com>
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Joe Stringer @ 2021-09-28 19:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Brendan Jackman
  Cc: luca.boccassi, bpf, Björn Töpel, Jiong Wang,
	Jakub Kicinski, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann,
	Andrii Nakryiko, Martin KaFai Lau, songliubraving, Yonghong Song,
	John Fastabend, KP Singh, daniel, fengc, jbacik, Luca Boccassi

On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 02:42, Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 02:06, <luca.boccassi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>>
>> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
>> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
>> samples are still GPL2-only.
>>
>> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example
>> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd
>> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
>>
>> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
>> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
>>
>> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
>> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>> ---
>> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived
>> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
>> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently
>> not possible.
>> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping
>> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
>>
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
>>
>> The authors of this file according to git log are:
>>
>> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
>> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
>
>
> Acked-by:  Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
>
>> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
>> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
>> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
>> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
>> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
>> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
>> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
>>
>> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
>>
>> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the
>> above list of authors will be necessary.
>>
>> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both
>> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus
>> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could
>> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue
>> we are currently facing.
>>
>>  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
>> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>>  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
>>  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
>>  #define __BPF_INSN_H
>> --
>> 2.33.0
>>

Acked-by: Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
       [not found]     ` <CAMOXUJ=gLLCDv0ZuEz77Qvepx9r0uTfy3J3phWuGPMQXsM1FGA@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2021-09-28 19:12       ` Chenbo Feng
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Chenbo Feng @ 2021-09-28 19:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Joe Stringer
  Cc: Brendan Jackman, luca.boccassi, bpf, Björn Töpel,
	Jiong Wang, Jakub Kicinski, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann,
	Andrii Nakryiko, Martin KaFai Lau, songliubraving, Yonghong Song,
	John Fastabend, KP Singh, daniel, jbacik, Luca Boccassi

Acked-by:  Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 12:12 PM Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> wrote:
>
> Acked-by:  Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 12:10 PM Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 02:42, Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 02:06, <luca.boccassi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>> >>
>> >> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
>> >> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
>> >> samples are still GPL2-only.
>> >>
>> >> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example
>> >> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd
>> >> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
>> >>
>> >> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
>> >> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
>> >>
>> >> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
>> >> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>> >> ---
>> >> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived
>> >> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
>> >> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently
>> >> not possible.
>> >> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping
>> >> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
>> >>
>> >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
>> >>
>> >> The authors of this file according to git log are:
>> >>
>> >> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
>> >> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
>> >> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
>> >
>> >
>> > Acked-by:  Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
>> >
>> >> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
>> >> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
>> >> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
>> >> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
>> >> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
>> >> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
>> >> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
>> >>
>> >> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
>> >>
>> >> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the
>> >> above list of authors will be necessary.
>> >>
>> >> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both
>> >> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus
>> >> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could
>> >> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue
>> >> we are currently facing.
>> >>
>> >>  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
>> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> >> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
>> >> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> >> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> >> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
>> >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>> >>  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
>> >>  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
>> >>  #define __BPF_INSN_H
>> >> --
>> >> 2.33.0
>> >>
>>
>> Acked-by: Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-28 15:44 ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-09-29 11:01   ` Björn Töpel
  2021-09-29 11:05     ` Luca Boccassi
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Björn Töpel @ 2021-09-29 11:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Luca Boccassi, Karlsson, Magnus; +Cc: bpf, joe, Daniel Borkmann

On Tue, 28 Sept 2021 at 17:44, Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote:
>

[...]

>
> Gentle ping. Björn and Joe, would be great to hear from you on the
> above. TIA!
>

Luca, apologies for the slow response. I'm no longer at Intel, and I'm
not sure if an Intel-person needs to do anything? Magnus, do you know?

FWIW:
Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org>

> --
> Kind regards,
> Luca Boccassi

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-29 11:01   ` Björn Töpel
@ 2021-09-29 11:05     ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-09-29 11:26       ` Magnus Karlsson
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Luca Boccassi @ 2021-09-29 11:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Björn Töpel, Karlsson, Magnus; +Cc: bpf, Mcnamara, John

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 918 bytes --]

On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 13:01 +0200, Björn Töpel wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Sept 2021 at 17:44, Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote:
> > 
> 
> [...]
> 
> > 
> > Gentle ping. Björn and Joe, would be great to hear from you on the
> > above. TIA!
> > 
> 
> Luca, apologies for the slow response. I'm no longer at Intel, and I'm
> not sure if an Intel-person needs to do anything? Magnus, do you know?
> 
> FWIW:
> Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org>

No worries! Unless you had an arrangement in place that made you the
copyright owner of that contribution (eg: it was done in spare time,
etc), then yes we'd need an ack to the relicense from an intel.com
email address to be above board.

John, is this something you could help with, using your manager hat?
Full context:

https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210923000540.47344-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com/T/#u

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-29 11:05     ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-09-29 11:26       ` Magnus Karlsson
  2021-09-29 11:27         ` Luca Boccassi
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Karlsson @ 2021-09-29 11:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Luca Boccassi
  Cc: Björn Töpel, Karlsson, Magnus, bpf, Mcnamara, John

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 1:20 PM Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 13:01 +0200, Björn Töpel wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Sept 2021 at 17:44, Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > >
> > > Gentle ping. Björn and Joe, would be great to hear from you on the
> > > above. TIA!
> > >
> >
> > Luca, apologies for the slow response. I'm no longer at Intel, and I'm
> > not sure if an Intel-person needs to do anything? Magnus, do you know?
> >
> > FWIW:
> > Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org>
>
> No worries! Unless you had an arrangement in place that made you the
> copyright owner of that contribution (eg: it was done in spare time,
> etc), then yes we'd need an ack to the relicense from an intel.com
> email address to be above board.

Will this do?

Acked-by: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@intel.com>

> John, is this something you could help with, using your manager hat?
> Full context:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210923000540.47344-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com/T/#u
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Luca Boccassi

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-29 11:26       ` Magnus Karlsson
@ 2021-09-29 11:27         ` Luca Boccassi
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Luca Boccassi @ 2021-09-29 11:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Magnus Karlsson
  Cc: Björn Töpel, Karlsson, Magnus, bpf, Mcnamara, John

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1088 bytes --]

On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 13:26 +0200, Magnus Karlsson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 1:20 PM Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 13:01 +0200, Björn Töpel wrote:
> > > On Tue, 28 Sept 2021 at 17:44, Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Gentle ping. Björn and Joe, would be great to hear from you on the
> > > > above. TIA!
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Luca, apologies for the slow response. I'm no longer at Intel, and I'm
> > > not sure if an Intel-person needs to do anything? Magnus, do you know?
> > > 
> > > FWIW:
> > > Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org>
> > 
> > No worries! Unless you had an arrangement in place that made you the
> > copyright owner of that contribution (eg: it was done in spare time,
> > etc), then yes we'd need an ack to the relicense from an intel.com
> > email address to be above board.
> 
> Will this do?
> 
> Acked-by: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@intel.com>

Good enough for me, thank you!

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-23  0:05 [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause luca.boccassi
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
       [not found] ` <CA+i-1C3sjrwtskbSZzera7ANL8dTiVWMBwLRhe=+1Ft6NgfL=A@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2021-09-29 16:06 ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-09-29 16:10   ` Daniel Borkmann
  2021-09-29 16:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
  5 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Luca Boccassi @ 2021-09-29 16:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf; +Cc: ast, daniel, Alexei Starovoitov

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3359 bytes --]

On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> 
> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
> samples are still GPL2-only.
> 
> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example
> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd
> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
> 
> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
> 
> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> ---
> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived
> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently
> not possible.
> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping
> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
> 
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
> 
> The authors of this file according to git log are:
> 
> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
> 
> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
> 
> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the
> above list of authors will be necessary.
> 
> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both
> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus
> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could
> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue
> we are currently facing.
> 
>  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
>  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
>  #define __BPF_INSN_H

Hello Alexei and Daniel,

We got the following acks so far:

Acked-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
Acked-by: Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
Acked-by: Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
Acked-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
Acked-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Acked-by: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@intel.com>

Magnus covers Intel's portion, and Simon covers Netronome's portion.

So as far as I understand, only your two acks are missing and then it's
job done and we can go home!

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-23  0:05 [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause luca.boccassi
                   ` (4 preceding siblings ...)
  2021-09-29 16:06 ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-09-29 16:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf @ 2021-09-29 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Luca Boccassi
  Cc: bpf, bjorn.topel, jackmanb, jiong.wang, jakub.kicinski, ast,
	daniel, andrii, kafai, songliubraving, yhs, john.fastabend,
	kpsingh, daniel, fengc, joe, jbacik, bluca

Hello:

This patch was applied to bpf/bpf.git (refs/heads/master):

On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 01:05:40 +0100 you wrote:
> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> 
> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
> samples are still GPL2-only.
> 
> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example
> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd
> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf/c/d75fe9cb1dd0

You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-29 16:06 ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-09-29 16:10   ` Daniel Borkmann
  2021-09-29 16:37     ` Luca Boccassi
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2021-09-29 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Luca Boccassi, bpf; +Cc: ast, Alexei Starovoitov

On 9/29/21 6:06 PM, Luca Boccassi wrote:
[...]
> So as far as I understand, only your two acks are missing and then it's
> job done and we can go home!

Already applied including both our ACKs.

Thanks!
Daniel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
  2021-09-29 16:10   ` Daniel Borkmann
@ 2021-09-29 16:37     ` Luca Boccassi
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Luca Boccassi @ 2021-09-29 16:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Daniel Borkmann, bpf; +Cc: ast, Alexei Starovoitov

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 366 bytes --]

On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 18:10 +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 9/29/21 6:06 PM, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> [...]
> > So as far as I understand, only your two acks are missing and then it's
> > job done and we can go home!
> 
> Already applied including both our ACKs.
> 
> Thanks!
> Daniel

Fantastic, thank you so much!

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-09-29 16:37 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-09-23  0:05 [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause luca.boccassi
2021-09-23 10:41 ` Luca Boccassi
2021-09-23 13:42   ` Quentin Monnet
2021-09-23 14:10     ` Simon Horman
2021-09-27 14:07   ` Luca Boccassi
2021-09-27 14:11     ` Daniel Mack
2021-09-27 14:27 ` Luca Boccassi
2021-09-27 14:39   ` Josef Bacik
2021-09-28 15:44 ` Luca Boccassi
2021-09-29 11:01   ` Björn Töpel
2021-09-29 11:05     ` Luca Boccassi
2021-09-29 11:26       ` Magnus Karlsson
2021-09-29 11:27         ` Luca Boccassi
     [not found] ` <CA+i-1C3sjrwtskbSZzera7ANL8dTiVWMBwLRhe=+1Ft6NgfL=A@mail.gmail.com>
2021-09-28 19:09   ` Joe Stringer
     [not found]     ` <CAMOXUJ=gLLCDv0ZuEz77Qvepx9r0uTfy3J3phWuGPMQXsM1FGA@mail.gmail.com>
2021-09-28 19:12       ` Chenbo Feng
2021-09-29 16:06 ` Luca Boccassi
2021-09-29 16:10   ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-09-29 16:37     ` Luca Boccassi
2021-09-29 16:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).