| Message ID | 1d2931e80c03f4d3f7263beaf8f19a4867e9fe32.1647212431.git.dxu@dxuuu.xyz (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Rejected |
| Delegated to: | BPF |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bpf-next] bpftool: Add SPDX identifier to btf-dump-file output | expand |
On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 4:01 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> wrote: > > A concern about potential GPL violations came up at the new $DAYJOB when > I tried to vendor the vmlinux.h output. The central point was that the > generated vmlinux.h does not embed a license string -- making the > licensing of the file non-obvious. > > This commit adds a LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause SPDX license identifier to > the generated vmlinux.h output. This is line with what bpftool generates > in object file skeletons. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> > --- > tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c > index a2c665beda87..fca810a27768 100644 > --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c > +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c > @@ -425,6 +425,7 @@ static int dump_btf_c(const struct btf *btf, > if (err) > return err; > > + printf("/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause) */\n\n"); I don't think we can add any kind of license identifier to the auto generated output. vmlinux.h is a pretty printed dwarfdump.
Hi Alexei, On Tue, Mar 15, 2022, at 2:38 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 4:01 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> wrote: >> >> A concern about potential GPL violations came up at the new $DAYJOB when >> I tried to vendor the vmlinux.h output. The central point was that the >> generated vmlinux.h does not embed a license string -- making the >> licensing of the file non-obvious. >> >> This commit adds a LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause SPDX license identifier to >> the generated vmlinux.h output. This is line with what bpftool generates >> in object file skeletons. >> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> >> --- >> tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c >> index a2c665beda87..fca810a27768 100644 >> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c >> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c >> @@ -425,6 +425,7 @@ static int dump_btf_c(const struct btf *btf, >> if (err) >> return err; >> >> + printf("/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause) */\n\n"); > > I don't think we can add any kind of license identifier > to the auto generated output. > vmlinux.h is a pretty printed dwarfdump. Just so I understand better, when you say "I don't think we can", do you mean: 1) There may be legal issues w/ adding the license identifier 2) It doesn't make sense to add the license header 3) Something else? Thanks, Daniel
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 4:10 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> wrote: > > Hi Alexei, > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022, at 2:38 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 4:01 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> wrote: > >> > >> A concern about potential GPL violations came up at the new $DAYJOB when > >> I tried to vendor the vmlinux.h output. The central point was that the > >> generated vmlinux.h does not embed a license string -- making the > >> licensing of the file non-obvious. > >> > >> This commit adds a LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause SPDX license identifier to > >> the generated vmlinux.h output. This is line with what bpftool generates > >> in object file skeletons. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> > >> --- > >> tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c | 1 + > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c > >> index a2c665beda87..fca810a27768 100644 > >> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c > >> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c > >> @@ -425,6 +425,7 @@ static int dump_btf_c(const struct btf *btf, > >> if (err) > >> return err; > >> > >> + printf("/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause) */\n\n"); > > > > I don't think we can add any kind of license identifier > > to the auto generated output. > > vmlinux.h is a pretty printed dwarfdump. > > Just so I understand better, when you say "I don't think we can", > do you mean: > > 1) There may be legal issues w/ adding the license identifier > 2) It doesn't make sense to add the license header > 3) Something else? 2
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022, at 4:39 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 4:10 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> wrote: >> >> Hi Alexei, >> >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2022, at 2:38 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: >> > On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 4:01 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> wrote: >> >> >> >> A concern about potential GPL violations came up at the new $DAYJOB when >> >> I tried to vendor the vmlinux.h output. The central point was that the >> >> generated vmlinux.h does not embed a license string -- making the >> >> licensing of the file non-obvious. >> >> >> >> This commit adds a LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause SPDX license identifier to >> >> the generated vmlinux.h output. This is line with what bpftool generates >> >> in object file skeletons. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> >> >> --- >> >> tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c | 1 + >> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c >> >> index a2c665beda87..fca810a27768 100644 >> >> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c >> >> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c >> >> @@ -425,6 +425,7 @@ static int dump_btf_c(const struct btf *btf, >> >> if (err) >> >> return err; >> >> >> >> + printf("/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause) */\n\n"); >> > >> > I don't think we can add any kind of license identifier >> > to the auto generated output. >> > vmlinux.h is a pretty printed dwarfdump. >> >> Just so I understand better, when you say "I don't think we can", >> do you mean: >> >> 1) There may be legal issues w/ adding the license identifier >> 2) It doesn't make sense to add the license header >> 3) Something else? > > 2 Got it, thanks.
diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c index a2c665beda87..fca810a27768 100644 --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c @@ -425,6 +425,7 @@ static int dump_btf_c(const struct btf *btf, if (err) return err; + printf("/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause) */\n\n"); printf("#ifndef __VMLINUX_H__\n"); printf("#define __VMLINUX_H__\n"); printf("\n");
A concern about potential GPL violations came up at the new $DAYJOB when I tried to vendor the vmlinux.h output. The central point was that the generated vmlinux.h does not embed a license string -- making the licensing of the file non-obvious. This commit adds a LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause SPDX license identifier to the generated vmlinux.h output. This is line with what bpftool generates in object file skeletons. Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> --- tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)