[PATCH 02/22] dt-bindings: power: Add power-domain header for RV1126

[Jagan Teki]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 at 19:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski at linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 26/07/2022 15:44, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 02:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlowski at linaro.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 23/07/2022 22:43, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >>> Add power-domain header for RV1126 SoC from description in TRM.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing at rock-chips.com>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan at edgeble.ai>
> >>> ---
> >>>  include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
> >>>  create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h
> >>> new file mode 100644
> >>> index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7
> >>> --- /dev/null
> >>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
> >>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> >>
> >> Dual license and a blank line,  please.
> >
> > Yes, all rockchip power includes (at least here) are GPL-2.0 what is
> > the issue with it?
>
> The headers are part of bindings and all bindings should be dual
> licensed, so they can be used in other projects.
>
> Of course if copyright holder does not agree to release it on BSD, then
> it would be fine as exception. Also would be fine from us not to accept
> such bindings. :)

I don't hold anything here to use dual-licensing. The only thing I'm
wondering here is none of the rockchip power includes (which are
merged) are using dual-licensing they simply have GPL-2.0 which is
used in BSP.  Let me know what you suggest?

Thanks,
Jagan.