On 2023/5/22 16:14, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
Hi,
On 2023/5/21 20:21, WANG Xuerui wrote:
+ If in doubt, say "N". diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/loongson/Makefile b/drivers/gpu/drm/loongson/Makefile new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..9158816ece8e --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/loongson/Makefile @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+loongson-y := \ + lsdc_benchmark.o \ + lsdc_crtc.o \ + lsdc_debugfs.o \ + lsdc_device.o \ + lsdc_drv.o \ + lsdc_gem.o \ + lsdc_gfxpll.o \ + lsdc_i2c.o \ + lsdc_irq.o \ + lsdc_output_7a1000.o \ + lsdc_output_7a2000.o \ + lsdc_plane.o \ + lsdc_pixpll.o \ + lsdc_probe.o \ + lsdc_ttm.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_LOONGSON) += loongson.o diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/loongson/lsdc_benchmark.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/loongson/lsdc_benchmark.c new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..82961531d84c --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/loongson/lsdc_benchmark.c @@ -0,0 +1,133 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
Is it GPL-2.0, GPL-2.0-only, or GPL-2.0+? Please make sure all license IDs are consistent.
I see drm/vkms is also writing the copyrights similar.
with "# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only" in the Makefile,
while "// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+" in the C source file.
Sorry, I'm stupid, I can't figure out the difference between them.
Personally, I really don't care about this as along as checkpatch.pl don't complain.
I respect the maintainers of DRM, they didn't told me to change it.
I assume there is no problem.
It's your work after all, so you get to license the work however you want (inside the kernel project's licensing requirements, of course), so maintainers won't interfere with that.
I'm suggesting the license double-check because the whole driver is one piece of work, so it's better to be extra clear (you DO want to make sure things are clear when it comes to copyright, compliance & etc.) and make it as consistent as possible, but ultimately it's of course down to you. I think you may keep things as-is if others don't voice their concerns in the coming days.