| Message ID | 20210923000540.47344-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | d75fe9cb1dd062684c9fb8a4581738170365dc06 |
| Delegated to: | BPF |
| Headers | show |
| Series | samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| netdev/tree_selection | success | Not a local patch |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-PR | fail | PR summary |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR | success | PR summary |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf | fail | VM_Test |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next | success | VM_Test |
On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote: > From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > > libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in > software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the > samples are still GPL2-only. > > Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For > example > it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the > systemd > tree: > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h > > Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow > the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: > > 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") > 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") > > Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > --- > Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no > perceived > incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with > OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is > currently > not possible. > Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are > scoping > moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html > > The authors of this file according to git log are: > > Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> > Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> > Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> > Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> > Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> > Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> > Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> > Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> > Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> > > (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) > > All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in > the > above list of authors will be necessary. > > One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files > given both > libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger > and thus > it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this > header could > be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license > incompatibility issue > we are currently facing. > > samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 > --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ > /* eBPF instruction mini library */ > #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H > #define __BPF_INSN_H Got "address not found" for the following: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn and Jakub. I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address - Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack would cover both contributions?
2021-09-23 11:41 UTC+0100 ~ Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote: >> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> >> >> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in >> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the >> samples are still GPL2-only. >> >> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For >> example >> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the >> systemd >> tree: >> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h >> >> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow >> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: >> >> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") >> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") >> >> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> >> --- >> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no >> perceived >> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with >> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is >> currently >> not possible. >> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are >> scoping >> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: >> >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html >> >> The authors of this file according to git log are: >> >> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> >> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> >> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> >> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> >> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> >> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> >> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> >> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> >> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> >> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> >> >> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) >> >> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in >> the >> above list of authors will be necessary. >> >> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files >> given both >> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger >> and thus >> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this >> header could >> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license >> incompatibility issue >> we are currently facing. >> >> samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 >> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ >> /* eBPF instruction mini library */ >> #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H >> #define __BPF_INSN_H > > Got "address not found" for the following: > > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> > Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> > Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> > > Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn > and Jakub. > > I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address - > Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not > necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack > would cover both contributions? > Hi Luca, I believe Simon can handle this for Netronome, I'm adding him in copy. Quentin
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 02:42:39PM +0100, Quentin Monnet wrote: > 2021-09-23 11:41 UTC+0100 ~ Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > > On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote: > >> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > >> > >> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in > >> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the > >> samples are still GPL2-only. > >> > >> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For > >> example > >> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the > >> systemd > >> tree: > >> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h > >> > >> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow > >> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: > >> > >> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") > >> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > >> --- > >> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no > >> perceived > >> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with > >> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is > >> currently > >> not possible. > >> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are > >> scoping > >> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: > >> > >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html > >> > >> The authors of this file according to git log are: > >> > >> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> > >> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> > >> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> > >> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> > >> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> > >> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> > >> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> > >> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> > >> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> > >> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> > >> > >> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) > >> > >> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in > >> the > >> above list of authors will be necessary. > >> > >> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files > >> given both > >> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger > >> and thus > >> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this > >> header could > >> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license > >> incompatibility issue > >> we are currently facing. > >> > >> samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > >> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 > >> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > >> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > >> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ > >> /* eBPF instruction mini library */ > >> #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H > >> #define __BPF_INSN_H > > > > Got "address not found" for the following: > > > > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> > > Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> > > Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> > > > > Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn > > and Jakub. > > > > I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address - > > Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not > > necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack > > would cover both contributions? > > > > Hi Luca, I believe Simon can handle this for Netronome, I'm adding him > in copy. Yes, in the recent past we have handled a similar request like this: Acked-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com>
On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 11:41 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote: > > From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > > > > libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in > > software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the > > samples are still GPL2-only. > > > > Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For > > example > > it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the > > systemd > > tree: > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h > > > > Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow > > the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: > > > > 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") > > 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") > > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > > --- > > Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no > > perceived > > incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with > > OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is > > currently > > not possible. > > Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are > > scoping > > moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html > > > > The authors of this file according to git log are: > > > > Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> > > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> > > Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> > > Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> > > Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> > > Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> > > Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> > > Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> > > Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> > > Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> > > > > (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) > > > > All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in > > the > > above list of authors will be necessary. > > > > One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files > > given both > > libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger > > and thus > > it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this > > header could > > be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license > > incompatibility issue > > we are currently facing. > > > > samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > > index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 > > --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > > +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > > -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ > > /* eBPF instruction mini library */ > > #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H > > #define __BPF_INSN_H > > Got "address not found" for the following: > > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> > Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> > Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> > > Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn > and Jakub. > > I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address - > Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not > necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack > would cover both contributions? Gentle ping. We got ACKs from Netronome and Google so far (thanks!).
On 9/27/21 4:07 PM, Luca Boccassi wrote: > On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 11:41 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: >> On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote: >>> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> >>> >>> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in >>> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the >>> samples are still GPL2-only. >>> >>> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For >>> example >>> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the >>> systemd >>> tree: >>> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h >>> >>> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow >>> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: >>> >>> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") >>> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> >>> --- >>> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no >>> perceived >>> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with >>> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is >>> currently >>> not possible. >>> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are >>> scoping >>> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: >>> >>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html >>> >>> The authors of this file according to git log are: >>> >>> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> >>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> >>> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> >>> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> >>> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> >>> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> >>> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> >>> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> >>> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> >>> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> >>> >>> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) >>> >>> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in >>> the >>> above list of authors will be necessary. >>> >>> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files >>> given both >>> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger >>> and thus >>> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this >>> header could >>> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license >>> incompatibility issue >>> we are currently facing. >>> >>> samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >>> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 >>> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >>> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >>> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ >>> /* eBPF instruction mini library */ >>> #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H >>> #define __BPF_INSN_H >> >> Got "address not found" for the following: >> >> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> >> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> >> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> >> >> Trying again with different aliases from more recent commits for Björn >> and Jakub. >> >> I cannot find other commits from Jiong with a different email address - >> Jakub, do you happen to know how we can reach Jiong? Perhaps it's not >> necessary as it's Netronome that owns the copyright and thus your ack >> would cover both contributions? > > Gentle ping. We got ACKs from Netronome and Google so far (thanks!). > For my bits: Acked-by: Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> Thanks, Daniel
On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote: > From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > > libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in > software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the > samples are still GPL2-only. > > Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example > it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd > tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h > > Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow > the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: > > 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") > 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") > > Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > --- > Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived > incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with > OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently > not possible. > Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping > moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html > > The authors of this file according to git log are: > > Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> > Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> > Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> > Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> > Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> > Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> > Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> > Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> > Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> > > (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) > > All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the > above list of authors will be necessary. > > One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both > libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus > it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could > be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue > we are currently facing. > > samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 > --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ > /* eBPF instruction mini library */ > #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H > #define __BPF_INSN_H CC'ing Josef with a different address as requested.
On 9/27/21 10:27 AM, Luca Boccassi wrote: > On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote: >> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> >> >> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in >> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the >> samples are still GPL2-only. >> >> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example >> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd >> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h >> >> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow >> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: >> >> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") >> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") >> >> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> >> --- >> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived >> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with >> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently >> not possible. >> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping >> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: >> >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html >> >> The authors of this file according to git log are: >> >> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> >> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> >> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> >> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> >> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> >> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> >> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> >> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> >> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> >> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> >> >> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) >> >> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the >> above list of authors will be necessary. >> >> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both >> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus >> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could >> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue >> we are currently facing. >> >> samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 >> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ >> /* eBPF instruction mini library */ >> #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H >> #define __BPF_INSN_H > > CC'ing Josef with a different address as requested. > Thanks, my @fb email gets mangled so I don't use it anymore. You can add Acked-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Josef
On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote: > From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > > libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in > software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the > samples are still GPL2-only. > > Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example > it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd > tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h > > Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow > the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: > > 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") > 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") > > Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > --- > Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived > incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with > OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently > not possible. > Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping > moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html > > The authors of this file according to git log are: > > Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> > Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> > Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> > Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> > Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> > Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> > Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> > Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> > Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> > > (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) > > All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the > above list of authors will be necessary. > > One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both > libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus > it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could > be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue > we are currently facing. > > samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 > --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ > /* eBPF instruction mini library */ > #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H > #define __BPF_INSN_H Gentle ping. Björn and Joe, would be great to hear from you on the above. TIA!
On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 02:42, Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 02:06, <luca.boccassi@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> >> >> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in >> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the >> samples are still GPL2-only. >> >> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example >> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd >> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h >> >> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow >> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: >> >> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") >> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") >> >> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> >> --- >> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived >> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with >> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently >> not possible. >> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping >> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: >> >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html >> >> The authors of this file according to git log are: >> >> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> >> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> >> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> > > > Acked-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> > >> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> >> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> >> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> >> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> >> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> >> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> >> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> >> >> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) >> >> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the >> above list of authors will be necessary. >> >> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both >> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus >> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could >> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue >> we are currently facing. >> >> samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 >> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ >> /* eBPF instruction mini library */ >> #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H >> #define __BPF_INSN_H >> -- >> 2.33.0 >> Acked-by: Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
Acked-by: Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 12:12 PM Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> wrote: > > Acked-by: Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> > > On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 12:10 PM Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 02:42, Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 02:06, <luca.boccassi@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> >> >> >> >> libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in >> >> software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the >> >> samples are still GPL2-only. >> >> >> >> Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example >> >> it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd >> >> tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h >> >> >> >> Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow >> >> the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: >> >> >> >> 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") >> >> 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> >> >> --- >> >> Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived >> >> incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with >> >> OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently >> >> not possible. >> >> Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping >> >> moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: >> >> >> >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html >> >> >> >> The authors of this file according to git log are: >> >> >> >> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> >> >> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> >> >> Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> >> > >> > >> > Acked-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> >> > >> >> Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> >> >> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> >> >> Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> >> >> Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> >> >> Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> >> >> Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> >> >> Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> >> >> >> >> (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) >> >> >> >> All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the >> >> above list of authors will be necessary. >> >> >> >> One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both >> >> libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus >> >> it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could >> >> be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue >> >> we are currently facing. >> >> >> >> samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- >> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> >> index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 >> >> --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> >> +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h >> >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >> >> -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >> >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ >> >> /* eBPF instruction mini library */ >> >> #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H >> >> #define __BPF_INSN_H >> >> -- >> >> 2.33.0 >> >> >> >> Acked-by: Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org>
On Tue, 28 Sept 2021 at 17:44, Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote: > [...] > > Gentle ping. Björn and Joe, would be great to hear from you on the > above. TIA! > Luca, apologies for the slow response. I'm no longer at Intel, and I'm not sure if an Intel-person needs to do anything? Magnus, do you know? FWIW: Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org> > -- > Kind regards, > Luca Boccassi
On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 13:01 +0200, Björn Töpel wrote: > On Tue, 28 Sept 2021 at 17:44, Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > Gentle ping. Björn and Joe, would be great to hear from you on the > > above. TIA! > > > > Luca, apologies for the slow response. I'm no longer at Intel, and I'm > not sure if an Intel-person needs to do anything? Magnus, do you know? > > FWIW: > Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org> No worries! Unless you had an arrangement in place that made you the copyright owner of that contribution (eg: it was done in spare time, etc), then yes we'd need an ack to the relicense from an intel.com email address to be above board. John, is this something you could help with, using your manager hat? Full context: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210923000540.47344-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com/T/#u
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 1:20 PM Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 13:01 +0200, Björn Töpel wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Sept 2021 at 17:44, Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote: > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > Gentle ping. Björn and Joe, would be great to hear from you on the > > > above. TIA! > > > > > > > Luca, apologies for the slow response. I'm no longer at Intel, and I'm > > not sure if an Intel-person needs to do anything? Magnus, do you know? > > > > FWIW: > > Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org> > > No worries! Unless you had an arrangement in place that made you the > copyright owner of that contribution (eg: it was done in spare time, > etc), then yes we'd need an ack to the relicense from an intel.com > email address to be above board. Will this do? Acked-by: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@intel.com> > John, is this something you could help with, using your manager hat? > Full context: > > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210923000540.47344-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com/T/#u > > -- > Kind regards, > Luca Boccassi
On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 13:26 +0200, Magnus Karlsson wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 1:20 PM Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 13:01 +0200, Björn Töpel wrote: > > > On Tue, 28 Sept 2021 at 17:44, Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > Gentle ping. Björn and Joe, would be great to hear from you on the > > > > above. TIA! > > > > > > > > > > Luca, apologies for the slow response. I'm no longer at Intel, and I'm > > > not sure if an Intel-person needs to do anything? Magnus, do you know? > > > > > > FWIW: > > > Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org> > > > > No worries! Unless you had an arrangement in place that made you the > > copyright owner of that contribution (eg: it was done in spare time, > > etc), then yes we'd need an ack to the relicense from an intel.com > > email address to be above board. > > Will this do? > > Acked-by: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@intel.com> Good enough for me, thank you!
On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 01:05 +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote: > From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > > libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in > software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the > samples are still GPL2-only. > > Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example > it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd > tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h > > Dual-license this header as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause to follow > the same licensing used by libbpf and bpftool: > > 1bc38b8ff6cc ("libbpf: relicense libbpf as LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause") > 907b22365115 ("tools: bpftool: dual license all files") > > Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > --- > Most of systemd is (L)GPL2-or-later, which means there is no perceived > incompatibility with Apache2 softwares and can thus be linked with > OpenSSL 3.0. But given this GPL2-only header is included this is currently > not possible. > Dual-licensing this header solves this problem for us as we are scoping > moving to OpenSSL 3.0, see: > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2021-September/046882.html > > The authors of this file according to git log are: > > Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> > Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> > Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> > Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> > Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> > Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> > Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> > Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> > Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> > > (excludes a commit adding the SPDX header) > > All authors and maintainers are CC'ed. An Acked-by from everyone in the > above list of authors will be necessary. > > One could probably argue for relicensing all the samples/bpf/ files given both > libbpf and bpftool are, however the authors list would be much larger and thus > it would be much more difficult, so I'd really appreciate if this header could > be handled first by itself, as it solves a real license incompatibility issue > we are currently facing. > > samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 > --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ > /* eBPF instruction mini library */ > #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H > #define __BPF_INSN_H Hello Alexei and Daniel, We got the following acks so far: Acked-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> Acked-by: Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com> Acked-by: Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> Acked-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com> Acked-by: Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> Acked-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Acked-by: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@intel.com> Magnus covers Intel's portion, and Simon covers Netronome's portion. So as far as I understand, only your two acks are missing and then it's job done and we can go home!
Hello: This patch was applied to bpf/bpf.git (refs/heads/master): On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 01:05:40 +0100 you wrote: > From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> > > libbpf and bpftool have been dual-licensed to facilitate inclusion in > software that is not compatible with GPL2-only (ie: Apache2), but the > samples are still GPL2-only. > > Given these files are samples, they get naturally copied around. For example > it is the case for samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h which was copied into the systemd > tree: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/src/shared/linux/bpf_insn.h > > [...] Here is the summary with links: - samples/bpf: relicense bpf_insn.h as GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf/c/d75fe9cb1dd0 You are awesome, thank you! -- Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot. https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
On 9/29/21 6:06 PM, Luca Boccassi wrote: [...] > So as far as I understand, only your two acks are missing and then it's > job done and we can go home! Already applied including both our ACKs. Thanks! Daniel
On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 18:10 +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 9/29/21 6:06 PM, Luca Boccassi wrote: > [...] > > So as far as I understand, only your two acks are missing and then it's > > job done and we can go home! > > Already applied including both our ACKs. > > Thanks! > Daniel Fantastic, thank you so much!
diff --git a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h index aee04534483a..29c3bb6ad1cd 100644 --- a/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h +++ b/samples/bpf/bpf_insn.h @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ /* eBPF instruction mini library */ #ifndef __BPF_INSN_H #define __BPF_INSN_H