Re: paid support to understand and resolve some open issues

[Andrew Dennison]

Hi Alan,

We have reported the main problems we have observed in the example issues
mentioned below (#9840 and #11189) and also have some open PR for
performance related features. Our desire is to focus our team on product
functionality so we would like to offer to fund someone to help with any
Nuttx challenges we have so we can get them resolved without relying on
community members to generously donate their time.

In #9840, for example, we provided an example that demonstrates something
we observed but also suspect that the Linux Test Project _may_ also be
useful to confirm if this is a Nuttx problem.

As you mentioned, having something in ostest to detect the issue and verify
the fix / catch regressions would be ideal.

Kind regards,

Andrew Dennison
Chief Architect and Hardware Team Lead

On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 at 04:18, Alan C. Assis  wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
> Could you please open a public issue to report these issues (case you
> haven't yet).
>
> Also if you have some testing examples to trigger these issues, we could
> include it into our ostest to avoid it happening again.
>
> BR,
>
> Alan
>
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 3:45 AM Andrew Dennison <
> andrew.denni...@motec.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Nuttx community,
> >
> > We are actively working with nuttx and RISCV (RV32) and have contributed
> > several PR to improve support for kernel mode with litex:
> >
> >
> https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/platforms/risc-v/litex/cores/vexriscv_smp/index.html
> > .
> >
> > Along the way we have identified several issues and would like to offer
> to
> > pay for someone with appropriate experience to investigate and upstream
> any
> > fixes identified. Some examples:
> >
> > Experiencing possible race condition with pthread_cond_timedwait. #9840
> > <https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues/9840>
> > Unexpected behaviour with poll and tickless scheduler #11189
> > <https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues/11189>
> >
> > Please contact us directly if you feel you could help with either of
> these
> > issues or potentially some of the other recent issues here:
> > https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues?q=is%3Aopen+author%3Ag2gps+
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Andrew Dennison
>

>

-- 
*MoTeC Pty Ltd*

121 Merrindale Drive
Croydon South 3136
Victoria Australia
*T: *61 3 9761 5050
*W: *www.motec.com.au <https://www.motec.com.au/>


-- 
 <http://www.facebook.com/motec.global> 
<http://www.youtube.com/user/MoTeCAustralia> 
<https://www.instagram.com/motec_global/> 
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/motec-global>


-- 
 <https://www.motec.com.au>

-- 


Disclaimer Notice: This message, including any attachments, contains 
confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and 
is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you should 
delete this message. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this 
message or the taking of any action based on it is strictly prohibited.

paid support to understand and resolve some open issues

[Andrew Dennison]

Hi Nuttx community,

We are actively working with nuttx and RISCV (RV32) and have contributed
several PR to improve support for kernel mode with litex:
https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/platforms/risc-v/litex/cores/vexriscv_smp/index.html
.

Along the way we have identified several issues and would like to offer to
pay for someone with appropriate experience to investigate and upstream any
fixes identified. Some examples:

Experiencing possible race condition with pthread_cond_timedwait. #9840
<https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues/9840>
Unexpected behaviour with poll and tickless scheduler #11189
<https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues/11189>

Please contact us directly if you feel you could help with either of these
issues or potentially some of the other recent issues here:
https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues?q=is%3Aopen+author%3Ag2gps+

Kind regards,

Andrew Dennison
Chief Architect and Hardware Team Lead

-- 
*MoTeC Pty Ltd*

121 Merrindale Drive
Croydon South 3136
Victoria Australia
*T: *61 3 9761 5050
*W: *www.motec.com.au <https://www.motec.com.au/>


-- 
 <http://www.facebook.com/motec.global> 
<http://www.youtube.com/user/MoTeCAustralia> 
<https://www.instagram.com/motec_global/> 
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/motec-global>


-- 
 <https://www.motec.com.au>

-- 


Disclaimer Notice: This message, including any attachments, contains 
confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and 
is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you should 
delete this message. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this 
message or the taking of any action based on it is strictly prohibited.

Re: Better FPGA support on NuttX //was Re: [OT] Projects for GSoC 2024

[Andrew Dennison]

There is a litex (https://github.com/enjoy-digital/litex) target for nuttx
and litex supports generating a soc for many fpga Dev boards. While the
nuttx docs focus on using diligent arty, none of this is arty specific.

We are actively moving the litex support forward, with both flat and kernel
targets available and there are an expanding list of drivers for litex
peripherals.

On Tue, 20 Feb 2024, 12:35 pm Victor Suarez Rovere, 
wrote:

> Reference to cheap FPGA boards (< $20) were added to the new repo, more
> docs will follow there: https://github.com/cederom/nuttx-fpga
> So, FPGA is not strictly related to $$$
>

-- 
*MoTeC Pty Ltd*

121 Merrindale Drive
Croydon South 3136
Victoria Australia
*T: *61 3 9761 5050
*W: *www.motec.com.au 


-- 
  
 
 



-- 
 

-- 


Disclaimer Notice: This message, including any attachments, contains 
confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and 
is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you should 
delete this message. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this 
message or the taking of any action based on it is strictly prohibited.

Re: CTU CAN FD driver multi-licence for Nuttx

[Andrew Dennison]

Hi Alan,

Yes - I can view that list and have successfully subscribed.

Kind regards,

Andrew Dennison
Chief Architect and Hardware Team Lead


On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 at 03:17, Alan C. Assis  wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
> Sorry my delay, I opened the jira issue and they suggested me to ask
> at legal-discuss mailling list.
>
> I think it is public, so maybe everybody involved on this subject
> could be involved.
> Could you please confirm you have access to:
> https://lists.apache.org/list.html?legal-disc...@apache.org ?
>
> BR,
>
> Alan
>
> On 11/9/23, Andrew Dennison  wrote:
> > Hi Alan,
> >
> > Just confirming you got the suggested request i sent you off-list and
> that
> > it didn't end up in spam.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 21, 2023, 12:38 AM Alan C. Assis  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Andrew,
> >>
> >> I have access to Apache JIRA, please send me the suggested request and
> >> I will open a ticket there.
> >>
> >> BR,
> >>
> >> Alan
> >>
> >> On 10/20/23, Andrew Dennison  wrote:
> >> > To answer my own question: it seems public accounts are disabled for
> >> Apache
> >> > jira. If this is the next step what's the process to get this request
> >> > raised? Can someone here help?
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Oct 20, 2023, 7:12 AM Andrew Dennison
> >> > 
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Brennan,
> >> >>
> >> >> Is this something anyone can do? If so I'll take this step to move
> >> >> forward: it's been unclear how to get this question resolved.
> >> >>
> >> >> Kind regards,
> >> >>
> >> >> Andrew
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023, 1:36 AM Brennan Ashton
> >> >>  >> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> There is way to much speculation here (and some jus wrong
> >> >>> statements).
> >> >>> Someone just needs to open an Apache JIRA ticket with legal and you
> >> will
> >> >>> get an offical answer.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --Brennan
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, 2:54 AM Andrew Dennison <
> >> >>> andrew.denni...@motec.com.au>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > Hi all,
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Wow, i didn't think we were doing anything other than trying to
> >> >>> > help
> >> >>> > facilitate adding more driver support. The easiest approach seems
> >> >>> > to
> >> >>> > be
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> > get the os independent components licenced by the original authors
> >> >>> > in
> >> >>> > a
> >> >>> > compatible way so we can move forward with the technical element.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > My recollection is the license A OR B proposal came from a
> document
> >> on
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> > Apache website we were pointed to on this mailing list a few
> months
> >> >>> > ago,
> >> >>> > but maybe I'm mistaken.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Is this really the first time this has been debated? There seemed
> >> >>> > to
> >> >>> > be
> >> >>> > examples of this exact model when a had a quick look around.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I just want to find out if there is a way forward compatible with
> >> >>> > Apache
> >> >>> > requirements: IANAL and don't want to speculate on the way
> forward,
> >> >>> > just
> >> >>> > thought it was easier to ask.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Can anyone in the project help facilitate an "official" answer
> from
> >> >>> Apache?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Kind regards,
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Andrew
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > PS: the driver authors are not subscribed, so probably haven't
> seen
> >> >>> > 

Re: CTU CAN FD driver multi-licence for Nuttx

[Andrew Dennison]

Hi Alan,

Just confirming you got the suggested request i sent you off-list and that
it didn't end up in spam.

Thanks,

Andrew


On Sat, Oct 21, 2023, 12:38 AM Alan C. Assis  wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
> I have access to Apache JIRA, please send me the suggested request and
> I will open a ticket there.
>
> BR,
>
> Alan
>
> On 10/20/23, Andrew Dennison  wrote:
> > To answer my own question: it seems public accounts are disabled for
> Apache
> > jira. If this is the next step what's the process to get this request
> > raised? Can someone here help?
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 20, 2023, 7:12 AM Andrew Dennison
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Brennan,
> >>
> >> Is this something anyone can do? If so I'll take this step to move
> >> forward: it's been unclear how to get this question resolved.
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Andrew
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023, 1:36 AM Brennan Ashton  >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> There is way to much speculation here (and some jus wrong
> >>> statements).
> >>> Someone just needs to open an Apache JIRA ticket with legal and you
> will
> >>> get an offical answer.
> >>>
> >>> --Brennan
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, 2:54 AM Andrew Dennison <
> >>> andrew.denni...@motec.com.au>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Hi all,
> >>> >
> >>> > Wow, i didn't think we were doing anything other than trying to help
> >>> > facilitate adding more driver support. The easiest approach seems to
> >>> > be
> >>> to
> >>> > get the os independent components licenced by the original authors in
> >>> > a
> >>> > compatible way so we can move forward with the technical element.
> >>> >
> >>> > My recollection is the license A OR B proposal came from a document
> on
> >>> the
> >>> > Apache website we were pointed to on this mailing list a few months
> >>> > ago,
> >>> > but maybe I'm mistaken.
> >>> >
> >>> > Is this really the first time this has been debated? There seemed to
> >>> > be
> >>> > examples of this exact model when a had a quick look around.
> >>> >
> >>> > I just want to find out if there is a way forward compatible with
> >>> > Apache
> >>> > requirements: IANAL and don't want to speculate on the way forward,
> >>> > just
> >>> > thought it was easier to ask.
> >>> >
> >>> > Can anyone in the project help facilitate an "official" answer from
> >>> Apache?
> >>> >
> >>> > Kind regards,
> >>> >
> >>> > Andrew
> >>> >
> >>> > PS: the driver authors are not subscribed, so probably haven't seen
> >>> > this
> >>> > recently debate. I'll coordinate with them if there is a way forward.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, 6:49 PM Sebastien Lorquet <
> sebast...@lorquet.fr>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > Are you seriously taking legal advice, on behalf of an apache
> >>> > > project,
> >>> > > from a generative language model?
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Sebastien
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Le 17/10/2023 à 22:22, Alan C. Assis a écrit :
> >>> > > > Oops, it was: you cannot enforce both at same time.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Actually I think I was wrong (not about enforcing), but the main
> >>> issue
> >>> > > > about Dual license is how the contributions will evolve.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > I decided to ask about it to ChatGPT:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > "
> >>> > > > Question: if an open-source software X was released as dual
> >>> > > > license
> >>> > > > GPL and Apache License, can we used it in our project NuttX that
> >>> used
> >>> > > > Apache License?
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > If an open-source software X is released under both the GPL (GNU
> >>> > > &g

Re: CTU CAN FD driver multi-licence for Nuttx

[Andrew Dennison]

To answer my own question: it seems public accounts are disabled for Apache
jira. If this is the next step what's the process to get this request
raised? Can someone here help?

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023, 7:12 AM Andrew Dennison 
wrote:

> Hi Brennan,
>
> Is this something anyone can do? If so I'll take this step to move
> forward: it's been unclear how to get this question resolved.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Andrew
>
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023, 1:36 AM Brennan Ashton 
> wrote:
>
>> There is way to much speculation here (and some jus wrong statements).
>> Someone just needs to open an Apache JIRA ticket with legal and you will
>> get an offical answer.
>>
>> --Brennan
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, 2:54 AM Andrew Dennison <
>> andrew.denni...@motec.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Wow, i didn't think we were doing anything other than trying to help
>> > facilitate adding more driver support. The easiest approach seems to be
>> to
>> > get the os independent components licenced by the original authors in a
>> > compatible way so we can move forward with the technical element.
>> >
>> > My recollection is the license A OR B proposal came from a document on
>> the
>> > Apache website we were pointed to on this mailing list a few months ago,
>> > but maybe I'm mistaken.
>> >
>> > Is this really the first time this has been debated? There seemed to be
>> > examples of this exact model when a had a quick look around.
>> >
>> > I just want to find out if there is a way forward compatible with Apache
>> > requirements: IANAL and don't want to speculate on the way forward, just
>> > thought it was easier to ask.
>> >
>> > Can anyone in the project help facilitate an "official" answer from
>> Apache?
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> >
>> > Andrew
>> >
>> > PS: the driver authors are not subscribed, so probably haven't seen this
>> > recently debate. I'll coordinate with them if there is a way forward.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, 6:49 PM Sebastien Lorquet 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Are you seriously taking legal advice, on behalf of an apache project,
>> > > from a generative language model?
>> > >
>> > > Sebastien
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Le 17/10/2023 à 22:22, Alan C. Assis a écrit :
>> > > > Oops, it was: you cannot enforce both at same time.
>> > > >
>> > > > Actually I think I was wrong (not about enforcing), but the main
>> issue
>> > > > about Dual license is how the contributions will evolve.
>> > > >
>> > > > I decided to ask about it to ChatGPT:
>> > > >
>> > > > "
>> > > > Question: if an open-source software X was released as dual license
>> > > > GPL and Apache License, can we used it in our project NuttX that
>> used
>> > > > Apache License?
>> > > >
>> > > > If an open-source software X is released under both the GPL (GNU
>> > > > General Public License) and the Apache License, you generally have
>> > > > some flexibility in how you can use it in your project NuttX, which
>> is
>> > > > licensed under the Apache License. However, there are important
>> > > > considerations and potential complications to keep in mind:
>> > > >
>> > > >  Compatibility of Licenses:
>> > > >  The Apache License and the GPL are generally considered to
>> be
>> > > > compatible licenses. This means that you can include Apache-licensed
>> > > > code in a GPL-licensed project and vice versa without violating the
>> > > > terms of either license.
>> > > >
>> > > >  License Choice:
>> > > >  When incorporating dual-licensed code into your project,
>> you
>> > > > have a choice in which license to follow. If you choose the Apache
>> > > > License, you can do so without any issues, as the Apache License is
>> > > > permissive. However, if you choose the GPL, you must comply with the
>> > > > terms of the GPL, which may include open-sourcing your entire
>> project
>> > > > under the GPL.
>> > > >
>> > > >  Potential GPL Implications:
>> > > > 

Re: CTU CAN FD driver multi-licence for Nuttx

[Andrew Dennison]

Hi Brennan,

Is this something anyone can do? If so I'll take this step to move forward:
it's been unclear how to get this question resolved.

Kind regards,

Andrew

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023, 1:36 AM Brennan Ashton 
wrote:

> There is way to much speculation here (and some jus wrong statements).
> Someone just needs to open an Apache JIRA ticket with legal and you will
> get an offical answer.
>
> --Brennan
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, 2:54 AM Andrew Dennison <
> andrew.denni...@motec.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Wow, i didn't think we were doing anything other than trying to help
> > facilitate adding more driver support. The easiest approach seems to be
> to
> > get the os independent components licenced by the original authors in a
> > compatible way so we can move forward with the technical element.
> >
> > My recollection is the license A OR B proposal came from a document on
> the
> > Apache website we were pointed to on this mailing list a few months ago,
> > but maybe I'm mistaken.
> >
> > Is this really the first time this has been debated? There seemed to be
> > examples of this exact model when a had a quick look around.
> >
> > I just want to find out if there is a way forward compatible with Apache
> > requirements: IANAL and don't want to speculate on the way forward, just
> > thought it was easier to ask.
> >
> > Can anyone in the project help facilitate an "official" answer from
> Apache?
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > PS: the driver authors are not subscribed, so probably haven't seen this
> > recently debate. I'll coordinate with them if there is a way forward.
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, 6:49 PM Sebastien Lorquet 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Are you seriously taking legal advice, on behalf of an apache project,
> > > from a generative language model?
> > >
> > > Sebastien
> > >
> > >
> > > Le 17/10/2023 à 22:22, Alan C. Assis a écrit :
> > > > Oops, it was: you cannot enforce both at same time.
> > > >
> > > > Actually I think I was wrong (not about enforcing), but the main
> issue
> > > > about Dual license is how the contributions will evolve.
> > > >
> > > > I decided to ask about it to ChatGPT:
> > > >
> > > > "
> > > > Question: if an open-source software X was released as dual license
> > > > GPL and Apache License, can we used it in our project NuttX that used
> > > > Apache License?
> > > >
> > > > If an open-source software X is released under both the GPL (GNU
> > > > General Public License) and the Apache License, you generally have
> > > > some flexibility in how you can use it in your project NuttX, which
> is
> > > > licensed under the Apache License. However, there are important
> > > > considerations and potential complications to keep in mind:
> > > >
> > > >  Compatibility of Licenses:
> > > >  The Apache License and the GPL are generally considered to
> be
> > > > compatible licenses. This means that you can include Apache-licensed
> > > > code in a GPL-licensed project and vice versa without violating the
> > > > terms of either license.
> > > >
> > > >  License Choice:
> > > >  When incorporating dual-licensed code into your project, you
> > > > have a choice in which license to follow. If you choose the Apache
> > > > License, you can do so without any issues, as the Apache License is
> > > > permissive. However, if you choose the GPL, you must comply with the
> > > > terms of the GPL, which may include open-sourcing your entire project
> > > > under the GPL.
> > > >
> > > >  Potential GPL Implications:
> > > >  Using the GPL-licensed version of software X may have
> > > > implications for the licensing of your entire project. The GPL is a
> > > > more restrictive license that requires you to release your entire
> > > > project under the GPL if you use GPL-licensed code. This could affect
> > > > how you distribute your project and any proprietary components within
> > > > it.
> > > >
> > > >  Be Careful with License Mixing:
> > > >  It's important to carefully manage the licensing of each
> > > > component within your project. Ensure that you clea

Re: CTU CAN FD driver multi-licence for Nuttx

[Andrew Dennison]

Hi all,

Wow, i didn't think we were doing anything other than trying to help
facilitate adding more driver support. The easiest approach seems to be to
get the os independent components licenced by the original authors in a
compatible way so we can move forward with the technical element.

My recollection is the license A OR B proposal came from a document on the
Apache website we were pointed to on this mailing list a few months ago,
but maybe I'm mistaken.

Is this really the first time this has been debated? There seemed to be
examples of this exact model when a had a quick look around.

I just want to find out if there is a way forward compatible with Apache
requirements: IANAL and don't want to speculate on the way forward, just
thought it was easier to ask.

Can anyone in the project help facilitate an "official" answer from Apache?

Kind regards,

Andrew

PS: the driver authors are not subscribed, so probably haven't seen this
recently debate. I'll coordinate with them if there is a way forward.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, 6:49 PM Sebastien Lorquet 
wrote:

> Are you seriously taking legal advice, on behalf of an apache project,
> from a generative language model?
>
> Sebastien
>
>
> Le 17/10/2023 à 22:22, Alan C. Assis a écrit :
> > Oops, it was: you cannot enforce both at same time.
> >
> > Actually I think I was wrong (not about enforcing), but the main issue
> > about Dual license is how the contributions will evolve.
> >
> > I decided to ask about it to ChatGPT:
> >
> > "
> > Question: if an open-source software X was released as dual license
> > GPL and Apache License, can we used it in our project NuttX that used
> > Apache License?
> >
> > If an open-source software X is released under both the GPL (GNU
> > General Public License) and the Apache License, you generally have
> > some flexibility in how you can use it in your project NuttX, which is
> > licensed under the Apache License. However, there are important
> > considerations and potential complications to keep in mind:
> >
> >  Compatibility of Licenses:
> >  The Apache License and the GPL are generally considered to be
> > compatible licenses. This means that you can include Apache-licensed
> > code in a GPL-licensed project and vice versa without violating the
> > terms of either license.
> >
> >  License Choice:
> >  When incorporating dual-licensed code into your project, you
> > have a choice in which license to follow. If you choose the Apache
> > License, you can do so without any issues, as the Apache License is
> > permissive. However, if you choose the GPL, you must comply with the
> > terms of the GPL, which may include open-sourcing your entire project
> > under the GPL.
> >
> >  Potential GPL Implications:
> >  Using the GPL-licensed version of software X may have
> > implications for the licensing of your entire project. The GPL is a
> > more restrictive license that requires you to release your entire
> > project under the GPL if you use GPL-licensed code. This could affect
> > how you distribute your project and any proprietary components within
> > it.
> >
> >  Be Careful with License Mixing:
> >  It's important to carefully manage the licensing of each
> > component within your project. Ensure that you clearly identify and
> > understand the licensing terms of each component and only include code
> > in your project that is compatible with the licensing choices you want
> > to make.
> >
> >  Consult Legal Advice:
> >  Dual licensing can be complex, and the specific terms of
> > software X may have variations or nuances that need legal
> > interpretation. It's advisable to consult with a legal expert who is
> > well-versed in open source licensing if you have any doubts or
> > concerns.
> >
> > In summary, you can use the dual-licensed software X in your project
> > NuttX that is under the Apache License. However, you need to make a
> > conscious choice about which license to follow for the code from
> > software X, and be aware of the potential implications, especially if
> > you decide to use the GPL-licensed version, as it may affect the
> > licensing of your entire project. Consulting with a legal expert is a
> > wise step when dealing with complex licensing issues.
> > "
> >
> > So, we are back to square one!
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > On 10/17/23, Alan C. Assis  wrote:
> >> Hi Tomek,
> >>
> >> On 10/17/23, Tomek CEDRO  wrote:
>  To be honest I don't see a big issue of a driver as dual license, we
>  already have SocketCAN and other drivers as dual license (GPL and
>  Apache, BSD and Apache, etc). The original Author said the want is to
>  be released as dual license: A or license B.
> >>> Isn't is more A AND B ?
> >>>
> >>> A OR B == I want A but not B so I stick to A ? :-P
> >>>
> >> No, because technically you can enforce two at same time, in that case
> >> GPL could prevail! :-)
> >>
>  The License war is terrible, I think there

Re: [OT] Link to YouTube NuttX Internacional Workshop

[Andrew Dennison]

Thanks Alan,

It was interesting to go through day 1, I'll catch up on day 2 tomorrow my
time.

On Fri, Sep 29, 2023, 10:37 PM Alan C. Assis  wrote:

> Please link the link below:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTzOhl7_kz8
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Alan
>

-- 
*MoTeC Pty Ltd*

121 Merrindale Drive
Croydon South 3136
Victoria Australia
*T: *61 3 9761 5050
*W: *www.motec.com.au 


-- 
  
 
 
 



-- 
 

-- 


Disclaimer Notice: This message, including any attachments, contains 
confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and 
is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you should 
delete this message. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this 
message or the taking of any action based on it is strictly prohibited.

Re: CTU CAN FD driver multi-licence for Nuttx

[Andrew Dennison]

On Wed, Sep 6, 2023, 9:07 PM Shane Curcuru  wrote:

> On 2023/08/09 00:20:42 Andrew Dennison wrote:
> > Hi Nuttx Dev,
> >
> > We are negotiating with the authors of the linux device driver for the
> CTU
> > CAN FD IP core to it re-licenced from GPL to so the driver can then be
> > ported to Nuttx.
>
> Just a reminder: Apache policy prohibits GPL code, or GPL-derived code,
> from being included in any ASF project:
>
>https://apache.org/legal/resolved#category-x
>
> If there is *any* question about the license of incoming code, then you
> should ask the Legal Affairs Committee for advice, after reviewing the
> ASF policy on source headers:
>
>
Hi Shane,

This is understood: as per teh original email we contacted all the
copyright holders of the out-of-tree linux driver and they have all agreed
to change the code to reference several licences:

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 at 19:48, Pavel Pisa  wrote:

>
> OK, consider driver code license and NuttX compatible.
> We need to discuss what will be actual variant and file
> headers text. I suggest
>
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ OR BSD-2-Clause OR Apache-2.0


This complies with my reading of a link provided by Brennan:

On Wed, 9 Aug 2023 at 10:43, Brennan Ashton 
wrote:

...

This is covered here
> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices
>

 Hopefully it is apparent that we are doing everything to ensure we can get
this driver integrated into nuttx so others can benefit. We could just
"scratch our own itch" and keep it external. That is less work, but we are
actively contributing to Nuttx (eg riscv, kernel mode enhancements and
litex platform support) as we see the value in doing this.

Kind Regards,

Andrew

-- 
*MoTeC Pty Ltd*

121 Merrindale Drive
Croydon South 3136
Victoria Australia
*T: *61 3 9761 5050
*W: *www.motec.com.au <https://www.motec.com.au/>


-- 
 <http://www.facebook.com/motec.global> 
<http://www.youtube.com/user/MoTeCAustralia> 
<https://www.instagram.com/motec_global/> 
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/motec-global> 
<https://twitter.com/motec_global>


-- 
 <https://www.motec.com.au>

-- 


Disclaimer Notice: This message, including any attachments, contains 
confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and 
is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you should 
delete this message. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this 
message or the taking of any action based on it is strictly prohibited.

Re: CTU CAN FD driver multi-licence for Nuttx

[Andrew Dennison]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2023 at 10:43, Brennan Ashton 
wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 8, 2023, 5:22 PM Andrew Dennison  >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Nuttx Dev,
> >
> > We are negotiating with the authors of the linux device driver for the
> CTU
> > CAN FD IP core to it re-licenced from GPL to so the driver can then be
> > ported to Nuttx.
> >
> > I've seen various licencing examples in the nuttx code base: but no high
> > level description that gives a definitive answer. For example there are
> > some cases where Authors are preserved and the code is BSD-2-Clause or
> > BSD-3-Clause (not Apache-2.0).
> >
> > We would appreciate some feedback on whether the proposal from Pavel
> below
> > is acceptable or if any minor adjustments would help.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Andrew Dennison
> > Chief Architect and Hardware Team Lead
> > MoTeC (A Bosch Company)
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 at 19:48, Pavel Pisa  wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > OK, consider driver code license and NuttX compatible.
> > > We need to discuss what will be actual variant and file
> > > headers text. I suggest
> > >
> > > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ OR BSD-2-Clause OR Apache-2.0
> > >
> > >
> >
> /***
> > >  *
> > >  * CTU CAN FD IP Core
> > >  *
> > >  * Copyright (C) 2015-2018 Ondrej Ille  FEE CTU
> > >  * Copyright (C) 2018-2020 Ondrej Ille 
> > self-funded
> > >  * Copyright (C) 2018-2019 Martin Jerabek 
> > > FEE CTU
> > >  * Copyright (C) 2018-2020 Pavel Pisa  FEE
> > > CTU/self-funded
> > >  *
> > >  * Project advisors:
> > >  * Jiri Novak 
> > >  * Pavel Pisa 
> > >  *
> > >  * Department of Measurement (http://meas.fel.cvut.cz/)
> > >  * Faculty of Electrical Engineering (http://www.fel.cvut.cz)
> > >  * Czech Technical University(http://www.cvut.cz/)
> > >  */
> > >
> > > I am not sure if that is acceptable for NuttX mainline, but I do not
> like
> > > process which stripped all information about real code authors when
> > > NuttX has been absorbed by Apache. The Copyright (C) statementscan be
> > > replaced
> > > by text "Authors list"  if copyright of NuttX copy should be
> transferred
> > > to Apache. But I would tend to keep list of authors who invested time,
> > > lot of it even from own spare one...
> > >
> >
>
>
> I want to call out one thing that does not seem right. That information is
> retained here
> https://github.com/apache/nuttx/blob/master/LICENSE
>
>
> This is covered here
> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices
>
>
> Hopefully that helps provide some guidance.
>
>
Hi Brennan,

Thanks for the additional information - I hadn't found the Apache link as I
was just looking at Nuttx in isolation and missed any reference there is to
that other page. From the apache link it would seem the following would be
acceptable:

1) The file headers can contain "// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ OR
BSD-2-Clause" and the author copyrights as proposed by Pavel. Note that I
have not included the Apache-2.0 licence as this does not seem to be
required, but I'm not sure it makes a difference either way.
2) The top level nuttx LICENCE file is updated with a statement that the
ctu_can_fd driver is being used under the terms of the BSD-2-Clause licence

Kind Regards,

Andrew

-- 
*MoTeC Pty Ltd*

121 Merrindale Drive
Croydon South 3136
Victoria Australia
*T: *61 3 9761 5050
*W: *www.motec.com.au <https://www.motec.com.au/>


-- 
 <http://www.facebook.com/motec.global> 
<http://www.youtube.com/user/MoTeCAustralia> 
<https://www.instagram.com/motec_global/> 
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/motec-global> 
<https://twitter.com/motec_global>


-- 
 <https://www.motec.com.au>

-- 


Disclaimer Notice: This message, including any attachments, contains 
confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and 
is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you should 
delete this message. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this 
message or the taking of any action based on it is strictly prohibited.

CTU CAN FD driver multi-licence for Nuttx

[Andrew Dennison]

Hi Nuttx Dev,

We are negotiating with the authors of the linux device driver for the CTU
CAN FD IP core to it re-licenced from GPL to so the driver can then be
ported to Nuttx.

I've seen various licencing examples in the nuttx code base: but no high
level description that gives a definitive answer. For example there are
some cases where Authors are preserved and the code is BSD-2-Clause or
BSD-3-Clause (not Apache-2.0).

We would appreciate some feedback on whether the proposal from Pavel below
is acceptable or if any minor adjustments would help.

Kind regards,

Andrew Dennison
Chief Architect and Hardware Team Lead
MoTeC (A Bosch Company)

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 at 19:48, Pavel Pisa  wrote:

>
> OK, consider driver code license and NuttX compatible.
> We need to discuss what will be actual variant and file
> headers text. I suggest
>
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ OR BSD-2-Clause OR Apache-2.0
>
> /***
>  *
>  * CTU CAN FD IP Core
>  *
>  * Copyright (C) 2015-2018 Ondrej Ille  FEE CTU
>  * Copyright (C) 2018-2020 Ondrej Ille  self-funded
>  * Copyright (C) 2018-2019 Martin Jerabek 
> FEE CTU
>  * Copyright (C) 2018-2020 Pavel Pisa  FEE
> CTU/self-funded
>  *
>  * Project advisors:
>  * Jiri Novak 
>  * Pavel Pisa 
>  *
>  * Department of Measurement (http://meas.fel.cvut.cz/)
>  * Faculty of Electrical Engineering (http://www.fel.cvut.cz)
>  * Czech Technical University(http://www.cvut.cz/)
>  */
>
> I am not sure if that is acceptable for NuttX mainline, but I do not like
> process which stripped all information about real code authors when
> NuttX has been absorbed by Apache. The Copyright (C) statementscan be
> replaced
> by text "Authors list"  if copyright of NuttX copy should be transferred
> to Apache. But I would tend to keep list of authors who invested time,
> lot of it even from own spare one...
>
>
>

-- 
*MoTeC Pty Ltd*

121 Merrindale Drive
Croydon South 3136
Victoria Australia
*T: *61 3 9761 5050
*W: *www.motec.com.au <https://www.motec.com.au/>


-- 
 <http://www.facebook.com/motec.global> 
<http://www.youtube.com/user/MoTeCAustralia> 
<https://www.instagram.com/motec_global/> 
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/motec-global> 
<https://twitter.com/motec_global>


-- 
 <https://www.motec.com.au>

-- 


Disclaimer Notice: This message, including any attachments, contains 
confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and 
is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you should 
delete this message. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this 
message or the taking of any action based on it is strictly prohibited.

Re: Debugging userspace with Nuttx protected build

[Andrew Dennison]

On Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 3:10 PM Gregory Nutt  wrote:

>
> On 4/24/2023 7:27 PM, Andrew Dennison wrote:
> > Are there any examples of a gdb setup to debug a userspace process? One
> key
> > issue is to setup the section offsets to match the final application
> > location once it has been loaded.
>
> You don't describe your build, so I only give you a general answer.
>


This is for a kernel build targeting risvc32.



> This does not specifically address what you need to do, but might be
> helpful:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NUTTX/Debugging+ELF+Loadable+Modules
>
> I think the basics would be the same for all builds.
>

Similar to debugging Linux kernel modules.


> - You need to be able to stop the ELF module (FLAT or KERNEL build) or
> in FLASH program (PROTECTED build).
>
> - Then you can just add the symbol table of the ELF module )or user
> space) to the debugger.
>
> > I was actually quite surprised that Nuttx applications are still
> partially
> > linked with a protected build and that all sections overlap (start at 0)
> in
> > the elf file. I had expected the application would be fully linked to
> > virtual addresses as per linux and another RTOS I used previously. Is
> this
> > something that can be changed relatively easily, or are there some
> > significant challenges?
>
> That would effect the build logic and the binary loader.  The effort
> would probably be significant.
>
> Are you doing a kernel build?  In that case, all applications are
> partially linked ELF modules as you describe.  Linux positions .bss,
> .data, immediately after .text in the virtual address space.  Heap and
> thread stacks and other things are after that. So Linux applications can
> be fully linked.
>

I used a similar capability with a different small RTOS a while ago.


> NuttX allocates everything from the heap when the module is loaded.  So
> the application must be fully relocatable and address fix-ups are
> needed.  So the ELF module is a partially linked relocatable ELF file.
>

For the kernel build (or MMU support in general) I'd assumed Nuttx would
statically link and use the MMU to map the fixed elf section addresses to
the pages allocated from the heap. This also helps startup performance as
there are no relocations to process. But we're still learning the details
of how Nuttx goes together.

Debugging userspace with Nuttx protected build

[Andrew Dennison]

Are there any examples of a gdb setup to debug a userspace process? One key
issue is to setup the section offsets to match the final application
location once it has been loaded.

I was actually quite surprised that Nuttx applications are still partially
linked with a protected build and that all sections overlap (start at 0) in
the elf file. I had expected the application would be fully linked to
virtual addresses as per linux and another RTOS I used previously. Is this
something that can be changed relatively easily, or are there some
significant challenges?

Kind regards,

Andrew