From: Tarun Sahu <tsahu@linux.ibm.com>
To: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LTP] [RFC PATCH] Hugetlb: Migrating hugetlb tests from libhugetlbfs
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 15:36:10 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <32851d30c124e1a499edf3d8c7c0cf0cd04735cc.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yx7xOGLqy2lVE9tI@yuki>
Hi,
Thanks for confirming.
There is one more confirmation I required
before I submit a patch series on necessary libhugetlbfs tests,
Between
LTP and Kselftests, Choosing LTP is right decision? (mentioned details
in patch description)
Thanks
On Mon, 2022-09-12 at 10:43 +0200, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
> Hi!
> > As mentioned in the patch description, there is a conflict in
> > license,
> > That is why, I have avoided to put any of them in the header. Once
> > confirmed within the community, I can add the original license
> > here.
> > (GPL2.1+) as
> > https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/wiki/Test-Writing-Guidelines
> > this says only to add code with GPL2.0+.
>
> As far as I can tell there is no GPL2.1+ the only 2.1 version in
> existence is LGPL.
>
> GPL2.1+ usually happens to be an error when someone takes library
> header
> with LGPL2.1+ license and removes the "Lesser" part.
>
> However it looks like the whole libhugetlbfs is under LGPL2.1+ which
> kind of makes sense for a library, but not so much for the tests
> since
> these do not provide a library that can be linked againts at all.
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-12 10:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-08 17:39 [RFC PATCH] Hugetlb: Migrating hugetlb tests from libhugetlbfs Tarun Sahu
2022-09-09 9:06 ` [LTP] " Cyril Hrubis
2022-09-12 8:33 ` Tarun Sahu
2022-09-12 8:43 ` Cyril Hrubis
2022-09-12 10:06 ` Tarun Sahu [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=32851d30c124e1a499edf3d8c7c0cf0cd04735cc.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=tsahu@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=chrubis@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).