Re: [PATCH 2/3] hw/mem/cxl_type3: Add missing copyright and license notice

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 18:38:10 +0100
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Sept 2023 at 18:26, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9/18/23 10:00, Jonathan Cameron wrote:  
> > > On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 17:31:38 +0100
> > > Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >  
> > >> On Mon, 18 Sept 2023 at 16:04, Jonathan Cameron
> > >> <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> wrote:  
> > >>>
> > >>> This has been missing from the start. Assume it should match
> > >>> with cxl/cxl-component-utils.c as both were part of early
> > >>> postings from Ben.  
> > >>
> > >> Sounds plausible -- is there an Intel person who could give us
> > >> an acked-by for this?
> > >>
> > >> (Ideally we wouldn't have let more gpl-2-only code into the
> > >> codebase without a rationale...)
> > >>  
> > >
> > > I've +CC'd the kernel CXL maintainers from Intel a few of whom
> > > have also contributed some of the QEMU CXL code.
> > > Hopefully someone can ack.  
> >
> > I see that nvdimm.c from Intel is under LGPL 2.1. What is the typical 
> > license this should be applied for QEMU?  
> 
> The project has a mix of licenses, for mostly historical reasons.
> The overall license is thus GPLv2 (as the most-restrictive of the set).
> Our preference (as noted in the top level LICENSE file) for new
> code is for GPL-v2-or-later; we can take other GPL-2-compatible
> licenses (preferably GPL-v2-or-later compatible) if there's a
> good rationale from the submitter. (Historically, one reason
> for the GPL-v2-only code has been "this came from the Linux
> kernel and so it's GPL-2-only"; "we copied a lot of this code
> from some other file in QEMU and that has license X" is
> the other one.)

As this one is now 'historical' code I'll stick to the v2 only
but make sure anything new goes in with v2 or later unless there is
a good reason for another choice.

Thanks for the info,

Jonathan

> 
> thanks
> -- PMM
>