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=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 6E353C433E1 for ; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 09:32:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4066F2072D for ; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 09:32:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1594546322; bh=QbBUjOO2ONnvgGnMB4P8D8RHlpRM3HwBtK8P2s+FuHo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=akPgfktqPC/fBrN+EMEi/sp3pH+hR6fV+m2CpfemOyVgURkMJ82DNxb2//qDQrSXc 7FhcV0qgKvTXjRC6v2gL+iGGK+Y7F3poiOymdu3H71Z1qKiFbtSPYOfpJ6sLtsSbqY ZlVQ0RelSGD++JjafCTjOn61OMQH+AGLnb2RLVvA= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728618AbgGLJcB (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Jul 2020 05:32:01 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:44566 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728341AbgGLJcA (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Jul 2020 05:32:00 -0400 Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 72F7720720; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 09:31:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1594546320; bh=QbBUjOO2ONnvgGnMB4P8D8RHlpRM3HwBtK8P2s+FuHo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=DIOaCGD1+bjKJDJVKTV/O8HAFx/9ay39kyDx/3wyN+HoGE6tTP/yDj48Mz9D1nOrY NcF/EMHdvhav34JEa8FoC9yPWjPHQsDxtCoSjNQlNiqv7SRq9ZqLOhXXE9qhdYIrbY PvQ8mAXR4UcmxQWkXeaZKzzcDZQuy0ybtVVu0ClU= Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 11:31:55 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Pavel Machek Cc: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , Jacek Anaszewski , Dan Murphy , Jiri Slaby , kernel@pengutronix.de, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, Johan Hovold Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] leds: trigger: implement a tty trigger Message-ID: <20200712093155.GA179963@kroah.com> References: <20200707165958.16522-1-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> <20200707165958.16522-4-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> <20200712082453.GI8295@amd> <20200712084352.GA175558@kroah.com> <20200712085059.GA13495@amd> <20200712090217.GA177304@kroah.com> <20200712090731.GB13495@amd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200712090731.GB13495@amd> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 11:07:31AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Sun 2020-07-12 11:02:17, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:50:59AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > On Sun 2020-07-12 10:43:52, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:24:53AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/leds/trigger/ledtrig-tty.c > > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,192 @@ > > > > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > > > > > > > > > 2.0+ is preffered. > > > > > > > > No it is not, that's up to the developer. > > > > > > For code I maintain, yes it is. > > > > That's up to the developer of the code, not the maintainer, as the > > maintainer is not the copyright holder of it. For new files, it is up > > to the author of that code. No maintainer should impose a license rule > > like this on their subsystem, that's just not ok at all. The only > > "rule" is that it is compatible with GPLv2, nothing else. > > No, see for example device tree rules. Note, I don't agree with that rule, and if you have noticed, it's not really enforced. > Plus, IIRC it was you who asked the developer to "doublecheck with > their legal" when you seen GPL-2.0+. You can't really prevent me from > doing the same. Asking to verify that a specific license is what they really want it to be and they know the ramifications of it is NOT the same as saying "For code in the subsystem I maintain it has to be GPLv2+". thanks, greg k-h