On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 09:23:19AM +0000, Luca Fancellu wrote: > > > > On 2 May 2023, at 17:13, Anthony PERARD <anthony.per...@citrix.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 07:02:45AM +0100, Luca Fancellu wrote: > >> diff --git a/tools/include/xen-tools/arm-arch-capabilities.h > >> b/tools/include/xen-tools/arm-arch-capabilities.h > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 000000000000..ac44c8b14344 > >> --- /dev/null > >> +++ b/tools/include/xen-tools/arm-arch-capabilities.h > >> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ > >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > > > > Do you mean GPL-2.0-only ? > > > > GPL-2.0 is deprecated by the SPDX project. > > > > https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html > > > > > > Besides that, patch looks fine: > > Reviewed-by: Anthony PERARD <anthony.per...@citrix.com> > > Thanks, I’ll fix in the next push and I’ll add your R-by
Actually, could you use LGPL-2.1-only instead. As this code is to be included in libxl, and libxl is supposed to be LGPL-2.1-only, it might be better to be on the safe side and use LGPL for this new file. As I understand (from recent discussion about libacpi, and a quick search only), mixing GPL and LGPL code might mean the result is GPL. So just to be on the safe side, have this file been LGPL might be better. And it seems that it would still be fine to include that file in GPL projects. Would that be ok with you? Cheers, -- Anthony PERARD
