Re: [PATCH] samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause

[Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>]

2021-09-23 11:41 UTC+0100 ~ Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
> On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>>
>> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in
>> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the
>> samples are still GPL2-only.
>>
>> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For
>> example
>> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the
>> systemd
>> tree:
>> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h
>>
>> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow
>> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool:
>>
>> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause")
>> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>> ---
>> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no
>> perceived
>> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with
>> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is
>> currently
>> not possible.
>> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are
>> scoping
>> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see:
>>
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html
>>
>> The authors of this file according to git log are:
>>
>> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
>> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
>> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
>> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
>> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>
>> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
>> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
>> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
>> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
>>
>> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header)
>>
>> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in
>> the
>> above list of authors will be necessary.
>>
>> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files
>> given both
>> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger
>> and thus
>> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this
>> header could
>> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license
>> incompatibility issue
>> we are currently facing.
>>
>>  samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644
>> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>>  /* eBPF instruction mini library */
>>  #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H
>>  #define __BPF_INSN_H
> 
> Got "address not found" for the following:
> 
> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
> 
> Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn
> and Jakub.
> 
> I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address -
> Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not
> necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack
> would cover both contributions?
> 

Hi Luca, I believe Simon can handle this for Netronome, I'm adding him
in copy.

Quentin