On 01/03/2020 07:25 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On 1/3/20, zap <[email protected]> wrote: >> Just to be clear, you cannot legally sell risc-v processors even if you >> remove the trademarks. > like any trademark, if you make no mention of the trademark, or any > claims of "compliance", you're probably ok. > > from the time i worked on samba-tng, you can claim *compatibility* > with something that is a pun or the *inversion* of a trademark. > "arcfour-compatible" rather than "RC4 compliant". > > etnaviv. > > v-sirc. > > if you say "v-sirc compatible" and you're ok. So to be clear, is it because it could be very dangerous to work on risc-v without their help. >> And, OpenPower can be made more secure and lightweight then Risc-V. > that's very difficult to say. you start having to delve into what > "secure" means at both the architectural, ISA *and* design level. > "lightweight" is much easier to compare however would still take a > significant amount of time. > > Well said then. Lightweight is what I concern over more to be fair. I am sure they are both equally or close to equally secure though - the meltdown spectre crap. ;)
_______________________________________________ arm-netbook mailing list [email protected] http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to [email protected]
