Alexei Starovoitov via llvm-dev
2015-Oct-20 16:15 UTC
[llvm-dev] RFC: Improving license & patent issues in the LLVM community
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> On 20 October 2015 at 16:59, Rafael EspĂndola > <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: >> Does anyone know if the apache 2 is compatible with the various LGPL versions? > > Wait, the BPF backend runs in the kernel. I'm not sure how integrated > they are, or how relevant this is, but unlike llvm-gcc, the BPF > backend would be a *big* shame to lose.that's not a problem. bpf backend produces code that runs in the kernel. That's no different than x86 backend produces code that runs in the kernel. bpf isa is free. There is iovisor/bcc project that uses both clang rewriter and llvm bpf backend statically linked, but it's using apache2 license, so no problem either.
Renato Golin via llvm-dev
2015-Oct-20 16:21 UTC
[llvm-dev] RFC: Improving license & patent issues in the LLVM community
On 20 October 2015 at 17:15, Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov at gmail.com> wrote:> that's not a problem. > bpf backend produces code that runs in the kernel. > That's no different than x86 backend produces code that runs in the kernel. > bpf isa is free. > There is iovisor/bcc project that uses both clang rewriter and > llvm bpf backend statically linked, but it's using apache2 license, > so no problem either.Hi Alexei, Excellent, thanks for the info! cheers, --renato