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

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 27/07/2022 09:09, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 12:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski at linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 27/07/2022 08:52, Jagan Teki wrote:
>>> 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?
>>
>> Hm, I think you asked this above and I answered that dual license should
>> be used. Maybe we misunderstand each other?
> 
> Sorry, I'm asking again as I'm liable to change the license here or not.
> 
>>
>> Do you include in this header any work which cannot be licensed on BSD
>> (e.g. is derivative of existing GPL-2 work)?
> 
> Yes, it is from BSP
> https://github.com/rockchip-linux/kernel/blob/develop-4.19/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h

Eh... if you don't have permission to relicense it and you copied the
IDs (although one would say it is not really copyrightable work), then
let it be GPL-2.0. In the future just write the IDs by yourself (not as
derivative work) and dual-license the header.

Best regards,
Krzysztof