Re: [v2] mfd: stm32: Adopt SPDX identifier

[Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>]

On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 06:28:11PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:23:37AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 04:24:18PM +0100, benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org wrote:
> > > Add SPDX identifier
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@st.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/mfd/stm32-lptimer.c       | 6 +-----
> > >  drivers/mfd/stm32-timers.c        | 4 +---
> > >  include/linux/mfd/stm32-lptimer.h | 6 +-----
> > >  include/linux/mfd/stm32-timers.h  | 4 +---
> > >  4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/stm32-lptimer.c b/drivers/mfd/stm32-lptimer.c
> > > index 075330a25f61..a00f99f36559 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mfd/stm32-lptimer.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/stm32-lptimer.c
> > > @@ -1,13 +1,9 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > >  /*
> > 
> > I have been wondering - why is the SPDX identifier for the most part added
> > as separate C++ comment at the beginning of the file, and not inline with
> > the rest of the top comments ?  SPDX doesn't mandate this - the examples
> > I can find on the SPDX web site all show it inline. Is there a special
> > Linux kernel convention ?
> 
> See the patch series from Thomas that answers this question for you by
> adding documentation to the kernel explaining it all :)
> 

So it is a special Linux kernel convention. Interesting (and brrr ... :-)
Thanks for the clarification.

Guenter