Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause

[Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>]

[-- 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 --]