Searched hist:"12301 cff" (Results 1 – 4 of 4) sorted by relevance
| /openbmc/linux/arch/arm64/boot/dts/socionext/ |
| H A D | uniphier-ld11-ref.dts | 12301cff Sun Jun 04 22:57:59 CDT 2017 Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> arm64: dts: uniphier: use SPDX-License-Identifier
Follow the recent trend for the license description, and fix the wrongly
stated X11 to MIT.
The X11 license text [1] is explicitly for the X Consortium and has a
couple of extra clauses. The MIT license text [2] is actually what the
current DT files claim.
[1] https://spdx.org/licenses/X11.html
[2] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
12301cff Sun Jun 04 22:57:59 CDT 2017 Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> arm64: dts: uniphier: use SPDX-License-Identifier
Follow the recent trend for the license description, and fix the wrongly
stated X11 to MIT.
The X11 license text [1] is explicitly for the X Consortium and has a
couple of extra clauses. The MIT license text [2] is actually what the
current DT files claim.
[1] https://spdx.org/licenses/X11.html
[2] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
|
| H A D | uniphier-ld20-ref.dts | 12301cff Sun Jun 04 22:57:59 CDT 2017 Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> arm64: dts: uniphier: use SPDX-License-Identifier
Follow the recent trend for the license description, and fix the wrongly
stated X11 to MIT.
The X11 license text [1] is explicitly for the X Consortium and has a
couple of extra clauses. The MIT license text [2] is actually what the
current DT files claim.
[1] https://spdx.org/licenses/X11.html
[2] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
12301cff Sun Jun 04 22:57:59 CDT 2017 Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> arm64: dts: uniphier: use SPDX-License-Identifier
Follow the recent trend for the license description, and fix the wrongly
stated X11 to MIT.
The X11 license text [1] is explicitly for the X Consortium and has a
couple of extra clauses. The MIT license text [2] is actually what the
current DT files claim.
[1] https://spdx.org/licenses/X11.html
[2] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
|
| H A D | uniphier-ld11.dtsi | 12301cff Sun Jun 04 22:57:59 CDT 2017 Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> arm64: dts: uniphier: use SPDX-License-Identifier
Follow the recent trend for the license description, and fix the wrongly
stated X11 to MIT.
The X11 license text [1] is explicitly for the X Consortium and has a
couple of extra clauses. The MIT license text [2] is actually what the
current DT files claim.
[1] https://spdx.org/licenses/X11.html
[2] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
12301cff Sun Jun 04 22:57:59 CDT 2017 Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> arm64: dts: uniphier: use SPDX-License-Identifier
Follow the recent trend for the license description, and fix the wrongly
stated X11 to MIT.
The X11 license text [1] is explicitly for the X Consortium and has a
couple of extra clauses. The MIT license text [2] is actually what the
current DT files claim.
[1] https://spdx.org/licenses/X11.html
[2] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
|
| H A D | uniphier-ld20.dtsi | 12301cff Sun Jun 04 22:57:59 CDT 2017 Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> arm64: dts: uniphier: use SPDX-License-Identifier
Follow the recent trend for the license description, and fix the wrongly
stated X11 to MIT.
The X11 license text [1] is explicitly for the X Consortium and has a
couple of extra clauses. The MIT license text [2] is actually what the
current DT files claim.
[1] https://spdx.org/licenses/X11.html
[2] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
12301cff Sun Jun 04 22:57:59 CDT 2017 Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> arm64: dts: uniphier: use SPDX-License-Identifier
Follow the recent trend for the license description, and fix the wrongly
stated X11 to MIT.
The X11 license text [1] is explicitly for the X Consortium and has a
couple of extra clauses. The MIT license text [2] is actually what the
current DT files claim.
[1] https://spdx.org/licenses/X11.html
[2] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
|