Re: [PATCHv4 1/1] thermal: intel Quark SoC X1000 DTS thermal driver

[Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>]

There might be a mismatch between the license stated in the comment at
the top of the (only) source file of this driver and the license ident
used in the MODULE_LICENSE() macro.

On Fri, 2015-04-10 at 12:07 +0800, Ong Boon Leong wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/intel_quark_dts_thermal.c

> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
> + * under the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License,
> + * version 2, as published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope it will be useful, but WITHOUT
> + * ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or
> + * FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU General Public License for
> + * more details.

This only states the license is GPL v2.

> +MODULE_LICENSE("Dual BSD/GPL");

And this states that there's a "GNU Public License v2 or BSD license
choice". But if that's what you want, shouldn't the BSD license be
copied in that comment too? (Please note that this is not a rhetorical
question.)

Thanks,


Paul Bolle