From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/45] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-new: Add acccessor to new struct vgic_irq instance Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 09:21:30 +0100 Message-ID: <571F250A.2040507@arm.com> References: <1460740316-8755-1-git-send-email-andre.przywara@arm.com> <1460740316-8755-6-git-send-email-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20160425161525.b4hqjrrharfdsdgo@hawk.localdomain> <20160425194901.GM16590@cbox> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andre Przywara , Eric Auger , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org To: Christoffer Dall , Andrew Jones Return-path: Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:52323 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752526AbcDZIVe (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Apr 2016 04:21:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160425194901.GM16590@cbox> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 25/04/16 20:49, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 06:15:25PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote: >> Hi Andre, >> >> I'm just randomly jumping in here because I spotted a typo in $SUBJECT. >> 'accessor' has too many c's. Also, just curious, but if the author is >> from Linaro (hi Christoffer), then why do the new files this patch adds >> have ARM copyrights? >> > > We just decided to let ARM deal with asserting the license since we all > collaborated on it, but others also suggested that we should let ARM and > Linaro share the license. I personally have no objections to having both ARM and Linaro sharing the copyright, but I just don't know how this works in practice (and asking any legal department is a sure recipe to delay these patches for an extra 6 months, give or take a few years). In the end, all I care about is the licence under which the code is released. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...