[Linux-stm32] [net-next PATCH v3 05/11] net: pcs: lynx: Convert to an MDIO driver

[Vladimir Oltean]

Hi Daniel,

On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 12:56:38AM +0100, Daniel Golle wrote:
> On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 01:18:34AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 06:03:35PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> > > On 5/6/25 17:58, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > > Hello Sean,
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 03:33:17PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> > > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-lynx.c b/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-lynx.c
> > > >> index 23b40e9eacbb..bacba1dd52e2 100644
> > > >> --- a/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-lynx.c
> > > >> +++ b/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-lynx.c
> > > >> @@ -1,11 +1,15 @@
> > > >> -// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR BSD-3-Clause)
> > > >> -/* Copyright 2020 NXP
> > > >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> > > >> +/* Copyright (C) 2022 Sean Anderson <seanga2 at gmail.com>
> > > >> + * Copyright 2020 NXP
> > > >>   * Lynx PCS MDIO helpers
> > > >>   */
> > > >>  
> > > >> -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("NXP Lynx PCS phylink library");
> > > >> -MODULE_LICENSE("Dual BSD/GPL");
> > > >> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("NXP Lynx PCS phylink driver");
> > > >> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> > > > 
> > > > What's the idea with the license change for this code?
> > > 
> > > I would like to license my contributions under the GPL in order to
> > > ensure that they remain free software.
> > > 
> > > --Sean
> > 
> > But in the process, you are relicensing code which is not yours.
> > Do you have agreement from the copyright owners of this file that the
> > license can be changed?
> > 
> 
> I think there is a misunderstanding here.
> 
> Of course the licence for the file remains dual BSD-3-Clause and GPL-2.0+ up
> to the change Sean wants to contribute. However, as he only permits GPL-2.0+
> the file after applying the change would then only be covered by GPL-2.0+ and
> no longer by BSD-3-Clause. Legally speaking there is no need to ask any of the
> previous authors for permission because they already agreed on having the
> code under GPL-2.0+ **OR** BSD-3-Clause, which means that everyone is free
> to distribute it under GPL-2.0+ (which is already the case when distributing
> it along with the Linux Kernel, obviously). Only netdev maintainers need to
> agree to drop the BSD-3-Clause licence **from future versions including his
> changes**, and there are obviously reasons for and against that.

Thanks for the clarification on the legal aspect, all clear.