[PATCH 3/6] shgen: Import from RTEMS

[Chris Johns]

On 07/06/2018 16:11, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 07/06/18 07:53, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 07/06/2018 15:39, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> Corresponding RTEMS commit is 75933d5d25cd50f80162b7a0d2f66a5534e1763f.
>>>
>>> Update #3443.
>>> ---
>>>   misc/shgen/AUTHORS |   3 +
>>>   misc/shgen/COPYING | 340 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   misc/shgen/TODO    |  13 ++
>>>   misc/shgen/sci.c   | 177 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   misc/shgen/sci.h   |  11 ++
>>>   misc/shgen/shgen.c | 114 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>   misc/wscript       |   9 ++
>>>   7 files changed, 667 insertions(+)
>>>   create mode 100644 misc/shgen/AUTHORS
>>>   create mode 100644 misc/shgen/COPYING
>>>   create mode 100644 misc/shgen/TODO
>>>   create mode 100644 misc/shgen/sci.c
>>>   create mode 100644 misc/shgen/sci.h
>>>   create mode 100644 misc/shgen/shgen.c
>>>
>>> diff --git a/misc/shgen/AUTHORS b/misc/shgen/AUTHORS
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..225c2fa
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/misc/shgen/AUTHORS
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
>>> +Ralf Corsepius (corsepiu at faw.uni-ulm.de)
>>> +    * Initial implementation
>>> +    * generator for sci bitrate table
>>> diff --git a/misc/shgen/COPYING b/misc/shgen/COPYING
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..8cc2ef7
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/misc/shgen/COPYING
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,340 @@
>>> +
>>> +            GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
>> The RTEMS tools is almost clean of GPL code. There is a small piece in the
>> rtemstoolkit I would to replace but I have not done that yet.
> 
> The nios2gen is also GPL (the RTEMS GPL with linking exception). Is this a
> problem?

We are moving to a BSD-2 license so I assumed this is part of that change?

> The GCC, GDB and Binutils are also GPL.

They are not in this repo. It is about our repos and the compliance obligations
users have with our code base.

> 
>>
>> Does this tool need to move over?
> 
> I would like to move all host tools out of the RTEMS repository to simplify the
> build. If we get rid of the host tools, then we have only to deal with the
> cross-build tools.

This is a good thing to do, thank you.

> 
>>   Is the sh arch active?
> 
> I don't know.

I suggest we remove this code until someone needs it and can resolve this issue.
The code is in the 4.11 releases so is easy to find.

> There was some activity on this architecture in GCC and Binutils
> recently. Some patents expired. This seemed to resurrect this architecture.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuperH
> 

I saw this. Until there is some activity it is impossible to know where this
will lead.

Chris