Re: [PATCH 1/2] crypto: vmx - Adding asm subroutines for XTS

Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 01:11:58AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

Hi Paulo,

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:34:27 -0300 Paulo Flabiano Smorigo [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 01:05:03PM +1000, Stewart Smith wrote:

quoted

Stephen Rothwell [off-list ref] writes:  

quoted

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 16:07:39 -0300 Paulo Flabiano Smorigo [off-list ref] wrote:  

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/crypto/vmx/aesp8-ppc.pl b/drivers/crypto/vmx/aesp8-ppc.pl
index 2280539..813ffcc 100644
--- a/drivers/crypto/vmx/aesp8-ppc.pl
+++ b/drivers/crypto/vmx/aesp8-ppc.pl

@@ -1,4 +1,11 @@
-#!/usr/bin/env perl
+#! /usr/bin/env perl
+# Copyright 2014-2016 The OpenSSL Project Authors. All Rights Reserved.
+#
+# Licensed under the OpenSSL license (the "License").  You may not use
+# this file except in compliance with the License.  You can obtain a copy
+# in the file LICENSE in the source distribution or at
+# https://www.openssl.org/source/license.html  

So, I assume that this license is compatible with the GPLv2?  

Andy released this code under the cryptogams license:

# ====================================================================
# Written by Andy Polyakov [off-list ref] for the OpenSSL
# project. The module is, however, dual licensed under OpenSSL and
# CRYPTOGAMS licenses depending on where you obtain it. For further
# details see http://www.openssl.org/~appro/cryptogams/.
# ====================================================================

Yeah, this license statement is already in the file being patched, so
why is the above license (and Copyright notice) being added above the
existing one?

aesp8-ppc.pl from Linux is almost the same as the one from OpenSSL and we do
that so we can keep it updated on both projects.
The above license lines were added to all pl files in OpenSSL so it ended up
here but since the author published it as cryptogams too we are ok.

quoted

The license is GPL compatible:

Good, thanks.

quoted

ALTERNATIVELY, provided that this notice is retained in full, this
product may be distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public
License (GPL), in which case the provisions of the GPL apply INSTEAD OF
those given above.

Which is not in this file or the patch, but presumably in the referred
to web page.

Yes, that comment is from the url pointed in the code.

Of course, I am not a lawyer :-)
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

-- 
Paulo Flabiano Smorigo
IBM Linux Technology Center