Re: [PATCH v9 6/6] drivers: remoteproc: Add Xilinx r5 remoteproc driver

[Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 03:02:22PM -0700, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> 
> On 9/1/22 1:25 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 06:39:55PM -0700, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> [ ... ]
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,1055 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> 
> Hi Mathieu,
> 
> I tried to fix SPDX-License-Identifier to GPL (same as MODULE_LICENSE
> below), However checkpatch.pl reports this as following warning:
> 
> "WARNING: 'SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL' is not supported in LICENSES/..."
> 
> I see that GPL-1.0 is under LICENSE/deprecated directory.
> 
> > > +/*
> > > + * ZynqMP R5 Remote Processor driver
> > > + *
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#include <dt-bindings/power/xlnx-zynqmp-power.h>
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_match);
> > > +
> > > +static struct platform_driver zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_driver = {
> > > +	.probe = zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_probe,
> > > +	.driver = {
> > > +		.name = "zynqmp_r5_remoteproc",
> > > +		.of_match_table = zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_match,
> > > +	},
> > > +};
> > > +module_platform_driver(zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_driver);
> > > +
> > > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Xilinx R5F remote processor driver");
> > > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Xilinx Inc.");
> > > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> > There is a discrepency between the GPL-2.0 in the SPDS identifier and the above.
> 
> Also, changing to MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2") gives following warning:
> 
> WARNING: Prefer "GPL" over "GPL v2" - see commit bf7fbeeae6db ("module: Cure
> the MODULE_LICENSE "GPL" vs. "GPL v2" bogosity")
> #1115: FILE: drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:1034:
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> 
> So, It looks like SPDX-License-Identifier should be GPL-2.0-only and
> MODULE_LICENSE should be change to "GPL".

Commit bf7fbeeae6db is an interesting read - thanks for pointing it out.

> 
> It this ok? Any other suggestions ?

What you have looks good, in that regard there is no need to change anything
from your patch. 

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tanmay
> 
> > 
> > More comments tomorrow or Tuesday.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Mathieu
> > 
> > > -- 
> > > 2.25.1
> > >