[U-Boot] [PATCH v3] x86: Import the glibc memset implementation

[Gabe Black]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Graeme Russ <graeme.russ at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Gabe,
>
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Gabe Black <gabeblack at google.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Graeme Russ <graeme.russ at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Gabe,
> >>
> >> Sorry about the lateness, but I just noticed a couple of issues..
> >>
> >> Can you put the glibc version in the patch summary? I know it is in
> >> string.c, but including it in the summary makes it more obvious.
> >>
> >> On 13/11/11 14:00, Gabe Black wrote:
> >> > The new implementation is about twice as fast as the old.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Gabe Black <gabeblack at chromium.org>
> >> > ---
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> > diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/string.c b/arch/x86/lib/string.c
> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> > index 0000000..1346173
> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> > +++ b/arch/x86/lib/string.c
> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
> >> > +/*
> >> > + * Copyright (C) 1991,1992,1993,1997,1998,2003, 2005 Free Software
> >> > Foundation, Inc.
> >>
> >> Line over 80 characters - I can live with this as it is a verbatim
> import
> >>
> >> > + * This file is part of the GNU C Library.
> >> > + * Copyright (c) 2011 The Chromium OS Authors. All rights reserved.
> >>
> >> This, however, causes a problem - There is some conjecture as to whether
> >> "All rights reserved" can co-exist with GPL. I believe there is a
> mandate
> >> from Wolfgang to not accept patches with this clause - Do I understand
> >> correctly Wolfgang?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Graeme
> >
> >
> > For reference, I ran this command
> > grep -R 'All rights reserved' * | wc -l
> > in a several months old U-Boot repository and got 238 hits, and ran it in
> > the Linux 2.6.39.3 source and got 3420 hits. There seems to be a lot of
> > precedence for this language in what I assume is mostly GPL-ed code. That
> > said, I'm not a lawyer and I'm personally not very worried about exactly
> how
> > this is worded beyond my obligations to my employer.
>
> A number of those hits are files using the BSD licence. Of course there are
> a lot in files using the GPL as well but as has been said before, bad
> practices of the past should not be used as an example for the future...
>
> I'm not too concerned by it either - I'm waiting for Wolfgang's response
>
> Regards,
>
> Graeme
>


I asked, and I've been told it's fine to remove that. I'll send a new
version soon.

Gabe