Re: [PATCH 1/2] Input: add support for Semtech SX8654 I2C touchscreen controller

[Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>]

On Sat, 2015-03-07 at 13:25 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> I am not sure if anyone cares about exact version of GPL in module
> information (2 only vs 2+) since it only used to figure out if the
> module taints kernel or not. In fact there are more modules that are v2
> only that claim GPL than the ones claiming GPL v2.
> 
> dtor@dtor-ws:~/kernel/master$ for file in `grep -r -l 'MODULE_LICENSE("GPL")'`; do grep -H '2 as published' $file; done | wc -l
> 259
> dtor@dtor-ws:~/kernel/master$ for file in `grep -r -l 'MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2")'`; do grep -H '2 as published' $file; do ne | wc -l
> 150
> 
> Also:
> 
> dtor@dtor-ws:~/kernel/master$ for file in `grep -r -l 'MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2")'`; do grep -H '2 or ' $file; done | wc -l
> 68
> dtor@dtor-ws:~/kernel/master$ for file in `grep -r -l 'MODULE_LICENSE("GPL")'`; do grep -H '2 or ' $file; done | wc -l
> 237

By that logic we might as well simplify the logic of
license_is_gpl_compatible() and MODULE_LICENSE() quite a bit. Why check
for six variants instead of just one and be done with it?

Anyhow, "GPL" and "GPL v2" are both allowed but not identical. So,
unless a patch is applied to treat them interchangeably, somehow, in the
module license checking code, we ought to make each instance of
MODULE_LICENSE() match the actual license of the module it's used for.

Yes, that's annoying. You're free to submit a patch to end all the
busywork this brings along. But I fear there's a reason for all that
busywork. Please prove me wrong. It would make everyone's life a bit
easier.


Paul Bolle