From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40285) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SEc0y-00076G-Tg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Apr 2012 03:49:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SEc0r-0001Mv-Br for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Apr 2012 03:49:24 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57615 helo=mx2.suse.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SEc0r-0001MZ-5k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Apr 2012 03:49:17 -0400 Message-ID: <4F7959F8.9020008@suse.de> Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2012 09:49:12 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1332816201-5072-1-git-send-email-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> <4F757DBD.9090206@suse.de> <4F757E21.1030808@suse.de> <20120331085013.GF19352@truffala.fritz.box> In-Reply-To: <20120331085013.GF19352@truffala.fritz.box> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Better support for dma_addr_t variables List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: David Gibson Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mst@redhat.com Am 31.03.2012 10:50, schrieb David Gibson: > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:34:25AM +0200, Andreas F=E4rber wrote: >> Am 30.03.2012 11:32, schrieb Andreas F=E4rber: >>> Am 27.03.2012 04:43, schrieb David Gibson: >>>> diff --git a/hw/qdev-dma.h b/hw/qdev-dma.h >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 0000000..e407771 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/hw/qdev-dma.h >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ >>>> +#include "qdev-addr.h" >>>> + >>>> +#define DEFINE_PROP_DMAADDR(_n, _s, _f, _d) = \ >>>> + DEFINE_PROP_TADDR(_n, _s, _f, _d) >>> >>> Is a new header just for this really needed? It's not being used in t= his >>> patch, so its necessity is hard to judge. ;) >> >> Additionally it's missing a license notice. >=20 > Just like qdev-addr.h. And qdev.h for that matter. >=20 > You seriously want a license notice for two lines of trivial macro? Yes, the issue here is under what license the file is. It's a new file, so in lack of a license statement is it under GPLv2 because QEMU as a whole currently is? Thus a header explicitly saying that it's under GPLv2+ (or BSD or MIT/X11 or ...) would be appreciated to avoid further complications. Compare our GPLv2+ relicensing page: http://wiki.qemu.org/Relicensing Andreas --=20 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=F6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=FCrnbe= rg