[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] USB: add SPDX identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/

On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:26:22AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 3:38 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
>> <> wrote:
>> > It's good to have SPDX identifiers in all files to make it easier to
>> > audit the kernel tree for correct licenses. This patch adds these
>> > identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/ based on a script and data from
>> > Thomas Gleixner, Philippe Ombredanne, and Kate Stewart.
>> >
>> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <>
>> > Cc: Kate Stewart <>
>> > Cc: Philippe Ombredanne <>
>> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <>
>> > ---
>> > Unless someone really complains, I'm going to add this to my tree for
>> > 4.15-rc1.
>> Glad to see this. I've been suggesting folks use SPDX tags on dts
>> files as those are often dual licensed, so we have lots of license
>> boilerplate. But I've had some push back[1] but it's not something I
>> care to spend cycles on. It would be good to have some statement on
>> the use of tags. Anything new should use them (I can dust off my
>> check for this)? This is a good task for newbies? It's
>> each maintainer's decision? It's the copyright holder's (and their
>> lawyer's) decision?
> As for what type of a task this is, we have a script and a huge database
> that has been worked on by some people to make a lot of this pretty
> "automatic" to apply.

I am one of the people that worked on scanning kernels for licenses
using my scancode tool [1] to help there.

Regarding and tooling to help review patches I can think of
two things:

1. when there is SPDX identifier in a patch, it could be checked for validity
I have a library for this [2] (this is in Python not Perl) but the checks needed
should be fairly trivial since there is not an open number of license
variations in the kernel: this could be re-written in Perl alright.

2. scancode can detect the licenses fairly accurately to spit and suggest
an SPDX license identifier and/or provide input to remove boilerplate either
for new patches or existing code. Not sure how to best integrate this as a
patch check step. Docs? Server-side tool? Any idea?

What would be the best thing to do next?

Philippe Ombredanne

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-24 12:37    [W:0.063 / U:2.488 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site