Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] test: add new driver_data load tester

Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-05-11T18:12:38Z

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 07:46:27PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 03:45:35AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/lib/test_driver_data.c b/lib/test_driver_data.c
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..11175a3b9f0a
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/lib/test_driver_data.c
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,1272 @@
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * Driver data test interface
> > > > + *
> > > > + * Copyright (C) 2017 Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org>
> > > > + *
> > > > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
> > > > + * under the terms of copyleft-next (version 0.3.1 or later) as published
> > > > + * at http://copyleft-next.org/.
> > >
> > > Is this compatible with GPLv2 for kernel modules?
> >
> > Yes, I went through all possible channels to vet for this, for details refer
> > to the thread which explains this [0] where the first attempt was to actually add
> > the license to the list of compatible licenses. So Linus' preference is to use
> > MODULE_LICENSE("GPL") rather.
> >
> > [0] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CA+55aFyhxcvD+q7tp+-yrSFDKfR0mOHgyEAe=f_94aKLsOu0Og@mail.gmail.com
>
> Thank you for this heads-up.
> According to Linus' comment, he seems to expect an explicit GPL license
> term to be in the beginning of the file, and then if you want, an additional
> license to be added, quote "if you want to dual-license it, just put something
> like "or, at your option, copyleft-next" in the comment at the top."

I think the or clause thing deserves some clarification so brought this up on the
old thread and Cc'd you.

Luis