[PATCH 0/3] ACPI: parse the SPCR table
Peter Hurley
peter at hurleysoftware.com
Thu Mar 3 12:08:36 PST 2016
Hi Al,
Somehow your email was filtered. Apologies for that.
On 02/10/2016 03:39 PM, Al Stone wrote:
> On 01/27/2016 05:17 AM, Aleksey Makarov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 01/25/2016 07:11 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
>>> On 01/25/2016 03:45 AM, Aleksey Makarov wrote:
>>>> This patchset is based on the patchset by Leif Lindholm [1]
>>>>
>>>> 'ARM Server Base Boot Requirements' [2] mention SPCR
>>>> (Serial Port Console Redirection Table) [3] as a mandatory
>>>> ACPI table that specifies the configuration of serial console.
>>>>
>>>> Licensing concerns have prevented implementing it in the past, but as of
>>>> 10 August 2015, these tables have both been released also under
>>>> OWF 1.0 [4].
>>>
>>> This license has a patent retaliation provision, which makes it
>>> incompatible with GPLv2.
>>>
>>> *If the license applies to this code*, then this patch set does not
>>> meet the criteria for submission.
>>
>> The license applies not to this code but to the document describing the tables.
>
> Just for the record, the SPCR table struct definition has been part
> of the Linux kernel since at least commit b24aad44 on 2009-07-24
> (line 1112 of include/acpi/actbl2.h) -- or so git blame tells me.
Just to be clear here:
The Microsoft specification, which defines the SPCR table struct and which
this patch series relies on, notes that patents apply. Specifically, it
says:
Patent Notice:
Microsoft is making certain patent rights available for implementations of this specification under two options:
1) Microsoft’s Community Promise, available at http://www.microsoft.com/openspecifications/en/us/programs/community-promise/default.aspx; or
2) The Open Web Foundation Final Specification Agreement Version 1.0 ("OWF 1.0") as of October 1, 2012, available at http://www.openwebfoundation.org/legal/the-owf-1-0-agreements/owfa-1-0.
Version 1.03 — August 10, 2015
I don't believe either of those patent licenses are GPL compatible.
Unless you're saying Red Hat is signing off on this?
Regards,
Peter Hurley
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list