Subject: U-Boot-Users Digest, Vol 11, Issue 91
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 13:13:59 -0700
List-Id: Universal Boot Loader general discussion <u-boot-users.lists.sourceforge.net>

Send U-Boot-Users mailing list submissions to
	[email-masked]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	[email-masked]

You can reach the person managing the list at
	[email-masked]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of U-Boot-Users digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Proposal for a make option to include an	additional stand
      alone program directory (Wolfgang Denk)
   2. doc for config options? (B?hn)
   3. Re: doc for config options? (Wolfgang Denk)
   4. Re: [PATCH] Use PVR to distinguish MPC5200B from	MPC5200 in
      boot message (Grant Likely)
   5. Re: Proposal for a make option to include an additional stand
      alone program directory (Timur Tabi)
   6. Re: Proposal for a make option to include an	additional stand
      alone program directory (Ulf Samuelsson)
   7. Re: Proposal for a make option to include an	additional stand
      alone program directory (Jerry Van Baren)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:40:29 +0200
From: Wolfgang Denk <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] Proposal for a make option to include an
	additional stand alone program directory
To: Timur Tabi <[email-masked]>
Cc: Ulf Samuelsson <[email-masked]>,
	[email-masked],	Jeff Mann
	<[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

In message <[email-masked]> you wrote:
>
> this is a GPL violation.  However, if the loader is not GPL, then I'm not sure.

If the loader is not GPL, then there is no doubt that it's a GPL
violation.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, HRB 165235 Munich, CEO: Wolfgang Denk
Office:  Kirchenstr. 5,       D-82194 Groebenzell,            Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: [email-masked]
Either one of us, by himself, is expendable.  Both of us are not.
	-- Kirk, "The Devil in the Dark", stardate 3196.1

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 13:03:46 +0200
From: B?hn, Oliver <[email-masked]>
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] doc for config options?
To: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID:
	<[email-masked]>
	
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear U-Boot users!
 
My name is Oliver B?hn and I'm a new U-Boot user.
 
During the past few days I'm trying to get a selfcompiled U-Boot running on our at91sam9260ek board with ST NAND256W3A, which didn't work so far.
 
I guess there are still some misconfigurations.
 
Question: Where do I find the doc for all the thousands of config variables like AT91C_SM_TDF and so forth?
Where do I find an explanation of what ECC is?
 
Helpful hints a very much appreciated.
 
 Oliver.

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential 
and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee.  
Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on 
the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may 
constitute a violation of law.  If you are not the intended 
recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to 
this e-mail, and delete the message from your system.  If you 
have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender 
immediately.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:22:26 +0200
From: Wolfgang Denk <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] doc for config options?
To: B?hn, Oliver <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

In message <[email-masked]> you wrote:
> 
> My name is Oliver B?hn and I'm a new U-Boot user.

Willkommen an Bord!

> Question: Where do I find the doc for all the thousands of config
> variables like AT91C_SM_TDF and so forth?

Grep the source tree.

> Where do I find an explanation of what ECC is?

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fehlerkorrekturverfahren

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, HRB 165235 Munich, CEO: Wolfgang Denk
Office:  Kirchenstr. 5,       D-82194 Groebenzell,            Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: [email-masked]
Veni, Vidi, VISA:
        I came, I saw, I did a little shopping.

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 08:23:13 -0600
From: "Grant Likely" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Use PVR to distinguish MPC5200B
	from	MPC5200 in boot message
To: "Bartlomiej Sieka" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], Stefan Roese <[email-masked]>
Message-ID:
	<[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

On 4/26/07, Bartlomiej Sieka <[email-masked]> wrote:
> MPC5200B systems are incorrectly reported as MPC5200 in U-Boot start-up
> message. Use PVR to distinguish between the two variants, and print proper CPU
> information.
>
> Signed-off-by: Grzegorz Wianecki <[email-masked]>
> Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Sieka <[email-masked]>

Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <[email-masked]>

Stefan, can you pick this up?

Thanks,
g.

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc. P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
[email-masked]
(403) 399-0195

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:00:39 -0500
From: Timur Tabi <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] Proposal for a make option to include an
	additional stand alone program directory
To: Wolfgang Denk <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], Jeff Mann
	<[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Wolfgang Denk wrote:

I really don't want to be arguing the GPL, but I am interested in a technical solution to 
a problem that is also legally permissible.

> Merging two binaries into one, so that A can make function calls into
> B *is* linking if the function of A depends on  the  results  of  the
> function calls of B.

How do you determine "depends"?  If B enables the 2nd Ethernet port, but you never 
actually use it, then A doesn't really depend on B.  Takes these two scenarios:

1) U-Boot runs the binary application that enables Ethernet 2, but it doesn't load the 
driver for Ethernet 2.  Therefore, the functioning of U-Boot does not depend on the binary.

1) U-Boot runs the binary application that enables Ethernet 2, and it loads the driver for 
Ethernet 2.  Therefore, the U-Boot can do Ethernet I/O on this device.

By your definition, scenario #1 is not a GPL violation, but scenario #2 is.  So I can 
merge my closed-source proprietary binary in with GPL as long as I don't enabled the 2nd 
Ethernet port.

> Linux system calls is an explicitely exported interface so it  is  OK
> to use this from application code.

So it's okay for a non-GPL binary to call GPL code, but not the other way around?

> Please do yourself a favour and re-read the GPL.

I don't think just reading the GPL is enough to understand it.  Some parts of it are 
vague, and their interpretations are debatable.

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 21:32:03 +0200
From: "Ulf Samuelsson" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] Proposal for a make option to include an
	additional stand alone program directory
To: "Timur Tabi" <[email-masked]>,	"Wolfgang Denk" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], Jeff Mann
	<[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <002601c78903$64f47cc0$01c4af0a@Glamdring>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original

> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> I really don't want to be arguing the GPL, but I am interested in a 
> technical solution to
> a problem that is also legally permissible.

If you follow the rule that you cannot execute U-Boot code
after you have executed non GPL code you will most likely not violate GPL.

Your technical solutions are obvious:

* Explain your problem to code owner and request code to be GPL.
* Drop the code, ask for interface info, and rewrite GPL code from scratch
* Write a program which calls the loader function, and then calls U-Boot.
   This can be non-GPL.

What you can't do is to have U-boot call a subroutine inside the non-GPL 
code,
nor can you from non-GPL code jump to any point except the start of u-boot.

>
>> Merging two binaries into one, so that A can make function calls into
>> B *is* linking if the function of A depends on  the  results  of  the
>> function calls of B.
>
> How do you determine "depends"?  If B enables the 2nd Ethernet port, but 
> you never
> actually use it, then A doesn't really depend on B.  Takes these two 
> scenarios:
>
> 1) U-Boot runs the binary application that enables Ethernet 2, but it 
> doesn't load the
> driver for Ethernet 2.  Therefore, the functioning of U-Boot does not 
> depend on the binary.
>

Your violation occurs when you make a subroutine call.
A pure jump which never returns is no violation.

If you, from U-boot enable some H/W using  call to non-GPL code,
and then jump to an application which uses the H/W, then
again you have violated the GPL.

> 1) U-Boot runs the binary application that enables Ethernet 2, and it 
> loads the driver for
> Ethernet 2.  Therefore, the U-Boot can do Ethernet I/O on this device.
>
> By your definition, scenario #1 is not a GPL violation, but scenario #2 
> is.  So I can
> merge my closed-source proprietary binary in with GPL as long as I don't 
> enabled the 2nd
> Ethernet port.
>
>> Linux system calls is an explicitely exported interface so it  is  OK
>> to use this from application code.
>
> So it's okay for a non-GPL binary to call GPL code, but not the other way 
> around?
>

U-Boot does not have any explicitly exported interfaces except its entry 
point.
If you in any way make the address of a subroutine inside U-boot available
to another application you link the application with U-Boot and the
application must be GPL.
You can jump to a binary which loads non-GPL stuff into another MCU
but you cant return to u-boot.

> Timur Tabi
> Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale
>

Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson 

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:13:39 -0400
From: Jerry Van Baren <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] Proposal for a make option to include an
	additional stand alone program directory
To: Ulf Samuelsson <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], Jeff Mann
	<[email-masked]>,	Timur Tabi <[email-masked]>, Wolfgang
	Denk <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
>> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>
>> I really don't want to be arguing the GPL, but I am interested in a 
>> technical solution to
>> a problem that is also legally permissible.
> 
> If you follow the rule that you cannot execute U-Boot code
> after you have executed non GPL code you will most likely not violate GPL.
> 
> Your technical solutions are obvious:
> 
> * Explain your problem to code owner and request code to be GPL.
> * Drop the code, ask for interface info, and rewrite GPL code from scratch
> * Write a program which calls the loader function, and then calls U-Boot.
>    This can be non-GPL.
> 
> What you can't do is to have U-boot call a subroutine inside the non-GPL 
> code,
> nor can you from non-GPL code jump to any point except the start of u-boot.

Not exactly true...

>>> Merging two binaries into one, so that A can make function calls into
>>> B *is* linking if the function of A depends on  the  results  of  the
>>> function calls of B.
>> How do you determine "depends"?  If B enables the 2nd Ethernet port, but 
>> you never
>> actually use it, then A doesn't really depend on B.  Takes these two 
>> scenarios:
>>
>> 1) U-Boot runs the binary application that enables Ethernet 2, but it 
>> doesn't load the
>> driver for Ethernet 2.  Therefore, the functioning of U-Boot does not 
>> depend on the binary.
> 
> Your violation occurs when you make a subroutine call.
> A pure jump which never returns is no violation.
> 
> If you, from U-boot enable some H/W using  call to non-GPL code,
> and then jump to an application which uses the H/W, then
> again you have violated the GPL.

Not exactly true...

>> 1) U-Boot runs the binary application that enables Ethernet 2, and it 
>> loads the driver for
>> Ethernet 2.  Therefore, the U-Boot can do Ethernet I/O on this device.
>>
>> By your definition, scenario #1 is not a GPL violation, but scenario #2 
>> is.  So I can
>> merge my closed-source proprietary binary in with GPL as long as I don't 
>> enabled the 2nd
>> Ethernet port.
>>
>>> Linux system calls is an explicitely exported interface so it  is  OK
>>> to use this from application code.
>> So it's okay for a non-GPL binary to call GPL code, but not the other way 
>> around?
>>
> 
> U-Boot does not have any explicitly exported interfaces except its entry 
> point.
> If you in any way make the address of a subroutine inside U-boot available
> to another application you link the application with U-Boot and the
> application must be GPL.
> You can jump to a binary which loads non-GPL stuff into another MCU
> but you cant return to u-boot.

Not exactly true...

U-Boot has a documented application interface that non-GPL "stand alone" 
applications may call.  This is equivalent to the linux system call API, 
that non-GPL applications may call.
   <http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBootdoc/StandalonePrograms>

<http://www.denx.de/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=README;h=90ef2c2eba66be9d011c84f34ca44cc637b76095;hb=HEAD#l3257>

3216 More About U-Boot Image Types:
3217 ------------------------------
3218
3219 U-Boot supports the following image types:
3220
3221    "Standalone Programs" are directly runnable in the environment
3222         provided by U-Boot; it is expected that (if they behave
3223         well) you can continue to work in U-Boot after return from
3224         the Standalone Program.

API:
<http://www.denx.de/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=include/exports.h;h=8f7f61703c6c47519794996d65931018b3216d86;hb=HEAD>

Examples:
<http://www.denx.de/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=u-boot.git;a=tree;f=examples;h=3b95ec59ee8e58fc459596dfd32b3c3b2a881d77;hb=HEAD>

>> Timur Tabi
>> Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale
> 
> Best Regards
> Ulf Samuelsson 

------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
U-Boot-Users mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users

End of U-Boot-Users Digest, Vol 11, Issue 91
********************************************