Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 4/4] libxl: Add interface for querying hypervisor about PCI topology

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 11:04 -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 01/20/2015 10:21 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 10:15 -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> >>>> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_linux.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_linux.c
> >>>> index ea5d8c1..07428c0 100644
> >>>> --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_linux.c
> >>>> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_linux.c
> >>>> @@ -279,3 +279,74 @@ libxl_device_model_version 
> >>>> libxl__default_device_model(libxl__gc *gc)
> >>>>    {
> >>>>        return LIBXL_DEVICE_MODEL_VERSION_QEMU_XEN;
> >>>>    }
> >>>> +
> >>>> +/* These two routines are "inspired" by pciutils */
> >>> "inspired" in a licensing consistent way?
> >> pciutils is licensed under GPL2 (e.g.
> >> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/pciutils/pciutils.git/tree/COPYING) so
> >> this would be consistent.
> > libxl is LGPL 2.1 not GPL2, and I'm afraid transitioning code in that
> > direction is not allowed by the license.
> 
> I didn't realize libxl was licensed differently from the rest of Xen.

Lots of the tools side is licensed under the LGPL, I believe the files
all have appropriate headers, and most subdirectories have a suitable
COPYING, but it looks like libxl does not.

> The code is not really coped from them (save for one-line comment) and 
> it's kind of hard to write it any differently, given that it's only a 
> few lines. The only reason I mentioned it was because I was parsing 
> /proc/bus/pci/devices before and while debugging some other problem 
> noticed that pciutils was using /sys/bus/pci/devices, which is slightly 
> better.
> 
> Perhaps I should get in touch with pciutils copyright holder to see if 
> he objects.

If you really feel you haven't copied any of their code I don't think
that would be necessary.

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel