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 Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48B63C7EE25 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2023 10:12:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.545826.852425 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q7Z6V-0000JU-VK; Fri, 09 Jun 2023 10:12:23 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 545826.852425; Fri, 09 Jun 2023 10:12:23 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q7Z6V-0000JN-S1; Fri, 09 Jun 2023 10:12:23 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 545826; Fri, 09 Jun 2023 10:12:23 +0000 Received: from mail.xenproject.org ([104.130.215.37]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q7Z6V-0000JD-3C for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2023 10:12:23 +0000 Received: from xenbits.xenproject.org ([104.239.192.120]) by mail.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q7Z6S-0008UD-LY; Fri, 09 Jun 2023 10:12:20 +0000 Received: from 54-240-197-225.amazon.com ([54.240.197.225] helo=[192.168.17.204]) by xenbits.xenproject.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q7Z6S-0002XU-FQ; Fri, 09 Jun 2023 10:12:20 +0000 X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xen.org; s=20200302mail; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From: References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID; bh=cPDfQPTnC55FGcDPGvjRkjeY+j8UG3Uy9bOdGy7TU64=; b=1HFo160GRjrzcUHrjiAJm2udnf ozvpC6Yc+JW9NrNEPvy8sGhuvTU7WvVzVzTVeLBZKSPcYlgTppUPWhNZ8eLLkG9wePWbF/cihVhHS WuEXEBT65jTu2FZtDl2kNyzCTOrahIObAOwpSOxnup5LIUCYlKYqb9fp+ehE21IEWJ9s=; Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 11:12:18 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.11.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] xen/ppc: Implement early serial printk on PaPR/pseries Content-Language: en-US To: Andrew Cooper , Jan Beulich Cc: tpearson@raptorengineering.com, George Dunlap , Stefano Stabellini , Wei Liu , Shawn Anastasio , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Shawn Anastasio References: <0c0a19de-dde3-8b98-4354-6d3d2019179b@suse.com> <0b24d36b-adbc-9e7c-df6e-8754c269855d@citrix.com> <1c35f696-5a65-06da-8af5-685b8ad2e849@xen.org> From: Julien Grall In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Andrew, On 09/06/2023 10:54, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 09/06/2023 10:46 am, Julien Grall wrote: >> On 09/06/2023 10:43, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>> On 09/06/2023 10:38 am, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 09.06.2023 11:29, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>>>> On 09/06/2023 10:22 am, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/ppc/boot_of.c >>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,122 @@ >>>>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later */ >>>>>> By default we mean to use ... >>>>>> >>>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/ppc/early_printk.c >>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ >>>>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >>>>>> ... the more modern form of this (GPL-2.0-only). Anything >>>>>> deviating from >>>>>> that may want justifying in the description. >>>>> GPL-2.0-or-later is fine. >>>> Hmm, I was merely following >>>> https://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2023-06/msg00415.html. >>>> The text at the top of ./COPYING looks to suggest -only, and I'm >>>> unaware of any other place where our default is actually written down. >>> >>> The license is chosen by the submitter/copyright holder, based on their >>> preferences/wishes. >>> >>> It's fine for Xen to say "if you've got no vested interest, we recommend >>> GPL-2.0-only", but that is strictly a recommendation and no more. >>> >>> If the submitter chooses GPL-2.0-or-later, that is their prerogative. >>> We have plenty of GPL-2.0-or-later code in Xen. >> >> From my past experience, the submitters tend to just copy the license >> from an existing file in Xen rather than explicitly choosing it. So I >> think it is fair to ask the question because our original and default >> license is GPLv2 nor GPLv2+. > > Did you read the bit in the cover letter about part of this code being > derived from the out-of-tree port years ago? Yes I read it... But I didn't check the original license and ... > > You're blindly assuming that there is even a choice of license available > to be used. ... I didn't assume anything here. I made a generic statement because your e-mail lead to think that all the submitter made a conscious decision. Note that, from past discussion, we agreed that it would be fine to re-license from gplv2+ to gplv2-only without requesting the original author. So technically there is a choice. As a side note, "blindly" is not very inclusive. We may have different view, but it doesn't mean yours is better than mine (and vice-versa). You could have express your opinion without saying "blindly" and it would have come across less rude. > The submitter chooses the license to use.  You can request that they > justify it, but you cannot demand that they change it. Strictly speaking we can refuse any code. That count for license as well. Anyway, I didn't request a change here. I merely pointed out that any use of GPLv2+ should be justified because on Arm most of the people don't pay attention on the license and pick the one from an existing file. Cheers, -- Julien Grall