On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Ian Campbell <ijc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2013-11-22 at 09:28 +0530, Anup Patel wrote: >> An Independent binary of a secured firmware makes more sense here. >> Also, if secured firmware is an independent binary then it need not be >> open source. > > In which case it should/can not have anything to do with u-boot nor > reuse any GPL'd u-boot code. The platform should supply the PSCI service > itself if you want to do this. > > I for one don't see this as an advantage. Further, independent secure firmware can be also used by UEFI or other bootloaders. For now we just need secure firmware loading service from u-boot, which is what this patchset does. -- Anup > > Ian. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/kvmarm
