Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 20 Jan 2023 10:25:42 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH V6 1/3] dt-bindings: clock: document Amlogic S4 SoC PLL & peripheral clock controller | From | Yu Tu <> |
| |
Hi Kevin,
On 2023/1/19 8:38, Kevin Hilman wrote: > [ EXTERNAL EMAIL ] > > Yu Tu <yu.tu@amlogic.com> writes: > >> On 2023/1/16 16:29, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > [...] > >>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 000000000000..bbec5094d5c3 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/amlogic,s4-peripherals-clkc.h >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@ >>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) */ >>> >>> Unusual license... are you sure to license the bindings under GPLv4 or >>> GPLv5? Fine by me. >>> >> >> Yes. > > The rest of the bindings for Amlogic SoCs are GPL-2.0 (without the '+'). > Adding the dual-license for MIT seems fine, but adding the '+' is > curious. > > It would be helpful if you could please explain why you'd like these > bindings to be licensed differently than the rest of the SoC family. >
I actually refer to the previous g12a Soc. https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2-rc4/source/include/dt-bindings/clock/g12a-clkc.h https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2-rc4/source/include/dt-bindings/clock/axg-clkc.h [...]
So if you think it is not necessary, I will delete the '+' as you suggested. Don't know what you choose?
> Kevin >
| |