From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755179AbbDKKER (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Apr 2015 06:04:17 -0400 Received: from lb2-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net ([194.109.24.26]:59435 "EHLO lb2-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752433AbbDKKEP (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Apr 2015 06:04:15 -0400 Message-ID: <1428746651.17822.83.camel@x220> Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 1/1] thermal: intel Quark SoC X1000 DTS thermal driver From: Paul Bolle To: Ong Boon Leong Cc: rui.zhang@intel.com, edubezval@gmail.com, pure.logic@nexus-software.ie, hock.leong.kweh@intel.com, andy.shevchenko@gmail.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2015 12:04:11 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1428638821-9737-2-git-send-email-boon.leong.ong@intel.com> References: <1428638821-9737-1-git-send-email-boon.leong.ong@intel.com> <1428638821-9737-2-git-send-email-boon.leong.ong@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-4.fc20) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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