Hi OpenBSD and NetBSD folks,
Here [1] is an e-mail from Daniel Vetter that probably affect you. It's
about the DRM subsystem license. It would be nice if you could reply to
the original post with your thoughts.
Thanks,
Simon Ser
[1]: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2019-November/243789.html
On Tuesday, November 12, 2019 4:03 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter%ffwll.ch@localhost> wrote:
Hi all,
Dave and me chatted about this last week on irc. Essentially we have:
$ git grep SPDX.*GPL -- ':(glob)drivers/gpu/drm/c'
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_client.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_damage_helper.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR MIT
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_cec.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid_load.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_format_helper.c:/ SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_cma_helper.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier:
GPL-2.0-or-later
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_framebuffer_helper.c://
SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_ttm_helper.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier:
GPL-2.0-or-later
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier:
GPL-2.0-or-later
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_hdcp.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_lease.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dbi.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_simple_kms_helper.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier:
GPL-2.0-or-later
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_sysfs.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vma_manager.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR MIT
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vram_helper_common.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier:
GPL-2.0-or-later
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_writeback.c:// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
One is GPL+MIT, so ok, and one is a default GPL-only header from
Greg's infamous patch (so could probably be changed to MIT license
header). I only looked at .c sources, since headers are worse wrt
having questionable default headers. So about 18 files with clear GPL
licenses thus far in drm core/helpers.
Looking at where that code came from, it is mostly from GPL-only
drivers (we have a lot of those nowadays), so seems legit non-MIT
licensed. Question is now what do we do:
- Nothing, which means GPL will slowly encroach on drm core/helpers,
which is roughly the same as ...
- Throw in the towel on MIT drm core officially. Same as above, except
lets just make it official.
- Try to counter this, which means at least a) relicensing a bunch of
stuff b) rewriting a bunch of stuff c) making sure that's ok with
everyone, there's a lot of GPL-by-default for the kernel (that's how
we got most of the above code through merged drivers I think). I
suspect that whomever cares will need to put in the work to make this
happen (since it will need a pile of active resistance at least).
Cc maintainers/driver teams who might care most about this.
Also if people could cc *bsd, they probably care and I don't know best
contacts for graphics stuff (or anything else really at all).
Cheers, Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel%lists.freedesktop.org@localhost
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel