Re: SPDX tag and top of file comment cleanups for the loop driver

Jens,

are the comments from Ted here enough to apply the series?  Or do
we need a formal Acked-by to be on the safe side?

On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 02:35:59PM -0700, tytso wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 10:13:34PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 04:06:28PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > > Ted, does the SPDX tag match your original licensing decision back then,
> > > > or do we need to correct it?  Does the auto-converted tag on the loop.h
> > > > SPDX header (GPL1.0 or later with syscall exception) make sense, or
> > > > should that have been GPL2 only with syscall exception?
> > > 
> > > I think you've removed the loop.h in the patch series, so it shouldn't
> > > matter what the tag would be for loop.h, right?  In any case, GPLv2
> > > only was certainly the intent at the time.
> > 
> > Well, there were two loop.h files - drivers/block/loop.h gets removed
> > in this series, but include/uapi/linux/loop.h stays.
> 
> Ah, thanks for the clarification.  Yes, GPLv2 with the syscall
> extension is what would be appropriate for include/uapi/linux/loop.h.
> 
> 	     	  	   	       - Ted
---end quoted text---