From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DC43C433DF for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 16:27:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5E7F207D8 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 16:27:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Qzzv4gof" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E5E7F207D8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jgsiC-0002kx-1e; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 16:27:24 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jgsiB-0002ks-2d for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 16:27:23 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 447f7158-a680-11ea-8993-bc764e2007e4 Received: from mail.kernel.org (unknown [198.145.29.99]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 447f7158-a680-11ea-8993-bc764e2007e4; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 16:27:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (c-67-164-102-47.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.164.102.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D6B9E206DC; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 16:27:21 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1591288042; bh=n+z53JuTQBr7A6TWR+WcVKvp5mm7k/fZNd4gEOeQgdE=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Qzzv4gofa7uoTMFNqYBbKReANB5dy5FBWlb2U754TKIplg4Krn91GZR80gWjeiWEp hc5R+dJTIaFOOTma9WaAbpZemnHdSZP2JPMr5UljTKF271tXp+Yi6ireXSlKoPqDPF TR0PIx8Iv2mit6Fcnev7PPipImhRdlW1vQjt6yaY= Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 09:27:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Stefano Stabellini X-X-Sender: sstabellini@sstabellini-ThinkPad-T480s To: Julien Grall Subject: Re: UEFI support in ARM DomUs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Peng Fan , Stefano Stabellini , Oleksandr Andrushchenko , Roman Shaposhnik , Nataliya Korovkina , Xen-devel Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On Thu, 4 Jun 2020, Julien Grall wrote: > On 04/06/2020 16:26, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > > On 6/4/20 4:57 AM, Peng Fan wrote: > > > Grall ; > > > > Nataliya Korovkina > > > > Subject: UEFI support in ARM DomUs > > > We have made U-Boot run inside XEN DomU, but just only PV console part, > > > not implement other frontend drivers currently. Would this help for your > > > case if enable EFI in U-Boot? > > > > Well, we have a working PV block implementation on top of that on iMX8 > > That's a nice work and will be a good addition. However... > > > > > platform, mostly ported from mini-os. Currently we are finalizing the work > > ... AFAICT mini-os is licensed using BSD-2 while U-boot is using GPLv2. So I > would be careful with the licensing here. > > It might be better to consider to port Linux PV driver instead or rewrite them > completely. Julien, I might be misunderstanding what you wrote. MiniOS is BSD-2 so MiniOS code can be integrated into a GPLv2 project without issues (becoming GPLv2.) So it should be OK to take MiniOS code and add it to Uboot? The other way around would be an issue: you cannot take GPLv2 code and add it to a BSD-2 project.