From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Bolle Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] pinctrl: Add driver for Alphascale asm9260 pinctrl Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 11:41:05 +0200 Message-ID: <1428313265.634.112.camel@x220> References: <1427476243.2334.12.camel@x220> <1428215185-14190-1-git-send-email-linux@rempel-privat.de> <1428215185-14190-2-git-send-email-linux@rempel-privat.de> <1428306169.634.51.camel@x220> <55224604.8070009@rempel-privat.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <55224604.8070009@rempel-privat.de> Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Oleksij Rempel Cc: linus.walleij@linaro.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2015-04-06 at 10:38 +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > If you won't to say: "You have a mismatch between header and > MODULE_LICENSE, please make sure it will match." > You saying some thing like this: "I was right last time. Make module > License like I saying." No, that's not what I wrote. > I'm confuse, what is your actual point? Do you trying to prove some thing? My point is that there's a mismatch between the license described in the comment at the top of this file and the ident used in the MODULE_LICENSE() macro. In my comments on v2 I wrote: By the way, you probably want to use "GPL v2" as the license ident [...]. In this v3 I noticed the same mismatch (which was not surprising because you already stated that "GPL" actually did match what's stated at the comment in the top of this file). Therefor I wrote: So only "GPL v2" matches what's found in the comment at top of this file. There now seem to be a few options: - change either the comment at the top of this file or the license ident used in MODULE_LICENSE() to make them actually match; - show that I misread the comment at top of this file; - or show that my reading of module.h is incorrect. (Another option would be a patch that somehow merges the "GPL" and "GPL v2" license idents. That patch would put an end to discussions like the one we're having here. I'm _not_ volunteering to submit it.) Thanks, Paul Bolle