From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763673AbYFHLNy (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2008 07:13:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757617AbYFHLNo (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2008 07:13:44 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:55730 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757542AbYFHLNo (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2008 07:13:44 -0400 Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 08:13:29 -0300 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: David Woodhouse Cc: Arjan van de Ven , David Miller , James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, ksummit-2008-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2008-discuss] RFC: Moving firmware blobs out of the kernel. Message-ID: <20080608081329.36dce5e1@gaivota> In-Reply-To: <1212102258.20303.6.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <1212077700.26088.83.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080529164745.GA21763@kroah.com> <483F1232.4010003@linux.intel.com> <20080529.140919.160813310.davem@davemloft.net> <483F1C17.8040207@linux.intel.com> <1212102258.20303.6.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.4.0 (GTK+ 2.12.10; x86_64-mandriva-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 30 May 2008 02:04:18 +0300 David Woodhouse wrote: > The firmware is an independent and separate work in itself. Section 2 of > the GPL talks about such sections of the work, explicitly. For me, both inside kernel or on a separate tree would produce similar results. Yet, a separate tree will be a little more painful. One alternative to keep this at kernel -git tree would be to write a COPYING or LICENSE file at firmware dir, explicitly stating that most of those firmwares have proprietary licenses and are there just to make easier for kernel develoment. Being in-tree or out kernel tree, we should explicitly state what license each firmware uses, and having the license terms of proprietary firmwares there. I would add a metatag at the .ihex file to reference to what license applies to each firmware. Something like FIRMWARE_LICENSE("some vendor license #1"). For those legacy firmwares where we don't know, we may simply add "unknown". Cheers, Mauro