Re: [U-Boot] Mainline u-boot on socfpga (SocKit) board
Hi! > > I know that mainline U-Boot SPL is quite far from working on > > socfpga... but would like to ask, what is the status of U-Boot > > proper. That should work on socfpga, right? Or are there some pieces > > missing? > > > > I tried > > > > commit 173d294b94cfec10063a5be40934d6d8fb7981ce > > Merge: 33b0f7b 870e0bd > > Author: Tom Rini > > Date: Tue May 6 14:55:45 2014 -0400 > > > > Merge branch 'serial' of git://www.denx.de/git/u-boot-microblaze > > > > and it just dies with no output. > > > > I'd really like to get something close to mainline working, so that I > > can generate patches etc. > > > > The missing piece here is the SDRAM driver. This is a big piece as > U-boot require the SDRAM to run. As of now, I am enhancing the existing > SDRAM drivers to ensure its compliance with the coding standard. I know about missing SDRAM driver, but that is in u-boot-spl, not u-boot (right?). I know u-boot-spl is not feasible right now, but I'd like to get at least u-boot proper to work. Is that something else that is known to be missing? > But nevertheless, it poses another challenge when come to license. The > driver is currently licensed under BSD-3 clause. Wonder can we upstream > BSD-3 clause code? Any advise would be appreciated. So: You are copyright holders, you can change the license. (Right?) Second, it seems that BSD-3 clause is actually GPL-compatible: Best regards, Pavel https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses Modified BSD license (#ModifiedBSD) This is the original BSD license, modified by removal of the advertising clause. It is a lax, permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL. This license is sometimes referred to as the 3-clause BSD license. The modified BSD license is not bad, as lax permissive licenses go, though the Apache 2.0 license is preferable. However, it is risky to recommend use of “the BSD license”, even for special cases such as small programs, because confusion could easily occur and lead to use of the flawed original BSD license. To avoid this risk, you can suggest the X11 license instead. The X11 license and the modified revised BSD license are more or less equivalent. However, the Apache 2.0 license is better for substantial programs, since it prevents patent treachery. -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] Mainline u-boot on socfpga (SocKit) board
Dear Chin Liang See, In message <1399544922.2064.19.ca...@clsee-virtualbox.altera.com> you wrote: > > But nevertheless, it poses another challenge when come to license. The > driver is currently licensed under BSD-3 clause. Wonder can we upstream > BSD-3 clause code? Any advise would be appreciated. It's your code, so why can't you relicense it under GPL? Why was it not licensed under GPL from the beginning when it'sbeen written for U-Boot? Technically, the "original BSD license, modified by removal of the advertising clause" (sometimes referred to as the "3-clause BSD license") is considered to be compatible with the GNU GPL. Best regards, Viele Grüße, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de "Spock, did you see the looks on their faces?" "Yes, Captain, a sort of vacant contentment." ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] Mainline u-boot on socfpga (SocKit) board
Hi Pavel, On Wed, 2014-05-07 at 17:48 +0200, ZY - pavel wrote: > Hi! > > I know that mainline U-Boot SPL is quite far from working on > socfpga... but would like to ask, what is the status of U-Boot > proper. That should work on socfpga, right? Or are there some pieces > missing? > > I tried > > commit 173d294b94cfec10063a5be40934d6d8fb7981ce > Merge: 33b0f7b 870e0bd > Author: Tom Rini > Date: Tue May 6 14:55:45 2014 -0400 > > Merge branch 'serial' of git://www.denx.de/git/u-boot-microblaze > > and it just dies with no output. > > I'd really like to get something close to mainline working, so that I > can generate patches etc. > The missing piece here is the SDRAM driver. This is a big piece as U-boot require the SDRAM to run. As of now, I am enhancing the existing SDRAM drivers to ensure its compliance with the coding standard. But nevertheless, it poses another challenge when come to license. The driver is currently licensed under BSD-3 clause. Wonder can we upstream BSD-3 clause code? Any advise would be appreciated. Thanks Chin Liang > Thanks, > Pavel ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
[U-Boot] Mainline u-boot on socfpga (SocKit) board
Hi! I know that mainline U-Boot SPL is quite far from working on socfpga... but would like to ask, what is the status of U-Boot proper. That should work on socfpga, right? Or are there some pieces missing? I tried commit 173d294b94cfec10063a5be40934d6d8fb7981ce Merge: 33b0f7b 870e0bd Author: Tom Rini Date: Tue May 6 14:55:45 2014 -0400 Merge branch 'serial' of git://www.denx.de/git/u-boot-microblaze and it just dies with no output. I'd really like to get something close to mainline working, so that I can generate patches etc. Thanks, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
