2019年1月7日(月) 20:37 Sakari Ailus [off-list ref]:

Hi Mita-san,

On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 02:12:45AM +0900, Akinobu Mita wrote:

quoted

Replace GPL license statements with SPDX license identifiers (GPL-2.0).

Cc: Guennadi Liakhovetski <redacted>
Cc: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/media/i2c/mt9m001.c | 5 +----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/mt9m001.c b/drivers/media/i2c/mt9m001.c
index a1a85ff..65ff59d 100644
--- a/drivers/media/i2c/mt9m001.c
+++ b/drivers/media/i2c/mt9m001.c

@@ -1,11 +1,8 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
 /*
  * Driver for MT9M001 CMOS Image Sensor from Micron
  *
  * Copyright (C) 2008, Guennadi Liakhovetski <kernel@pengutronix.de>
- *
- * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
- * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
- * published by the Free Software Foundation.
  */

 #include <linux/videodev2.h>

The MODULE_LICENSE macro at the end of the file lists "GPL" as the license,
i.e. including later versions. I'm not sure what was the intention
originally. I guess it's safer to stick to 2.0, at least unless the
original author is able to shed some light into this.

I've come across the same thought, and I found the following conversation.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/6/24/457

So I think MODULE_LICENSE() mismatch can be resolved in the future.