Re: [PATCH v2] arch/x86/kvm/ioapic: Remove license boilerplate with bad FSF address

On 28/07/2025 17.50, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 05:36:47PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 05:28:43PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> From: Thomas Huth <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> The Free Software Foundation does not reside in "59 Temple Place"
>>> anymore, so we should not mention that address in the source code here.
>>> But instead of updating the address to their current location, let's
>>> rather drop the license boilerplate text here and use a proper SPDX
>>> license identifier instead. The text talks about the "GNU *Lesser*
>>> General Public License" and "any later version", so LGPL-2.1+ is the
>>> right choice here.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>>   v2: Don't use the deprecated LGPL-2.1+ identifier
>>
>> If you look at the LICENSES/preferred/LGPL-2.1 file, it says to use:
>> 	SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1+
>>
>> as the kernel's SPDX level is older than you might think.
>>
>> Also, doesn't the scripts/spdxcheck.pl tool object to the "or-later"
>> when you run it on the tree with this change in it?
> 
> Ugh, sorry, no, it lists both, the tool should have been fine.  I was
> reading the text of the file, not the headers at the top of it.  My
> fault.

By the way, is there a reason why LICENSES/preferred/LGPL-2.1 suggests only 
the old variant:

   For 'GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) version 2.1 or any later
   version' use:
     SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1+

... while LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 suggests both:

   For 'GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2 or any later version' use:
     SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
   or
     SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later

That looks somewhat inconsistent to me... Should the LGPL files be updated?

  Thomas