Re: [PATCH v2 02/17] zinc: introduce minimal cryptography library

It seems you still don't explicitly clarify anywhere in the source itself that
the copyright holders of the code from OpenSSL have relicensed it under GPLv2.
I only see a GPLv2 license slapped on the files, yet no such license is presence
in the OpenSSL originals, at least in the one I checked.  If you did receive
explicit permission, then you should include an explicit clarification in each
file like the one in arch/arm/crypto/sha1-armv4-large.S.

Better yet, get the copyright holders to publicly send a
signed-off-by: or acked-by: so it is clear they agree to this.

	       Andrew