RTEMS | Draft: bsps/arm/stm32u5: Add a new BSP (!515)

[Christian Mauderer (@c-mauderer)]

Christian Mauderer started a new discussion: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/515#note_124796


The request should be ready now.

I'm not entirely sure about the handling of the license of the imported HAL (BSD 3 clause). At the moment, the BSP contains a LICENSE.md file with a list of the files under that license. That's similar to some powerpc BSPs, the utf8proc, jffs2 or acpica. An alternative would be to add a SPDX identifier to the imported sources. But I haven't found another BSP where we modified a HAL (or similar library) with SPDX identifiers.

@amar: I was a bit surprised about the result of the format.diff of one of the earlier runs (https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/pipelines/2881 to be exact). The format.diff showed only a few lines of one of the files that I added with the patch set but not all. Is that expected? If not: Should I open a ticket in the administration area? The format_full.diff is more what I would expect for this patch set.

-- 
View it on GitLab: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/515#note_124796
You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.rtems.org.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/bugs/attachments/20250617/10be7114/attachment.htm>