3 ms·
It's not about the license really. It's just that I see no real reason why we should consider all the propriety implementations of RISC-V any materially more op
by bragr 5y ago
It's not about the license really. It's just that I see no real reason why we should consider all the propriety implementations of RISC-V any materially more open source than any random ARM processor. Either way we know the ISA but little of the internals and can't practically audit or change them.
- snvzz 5y agoThe implementation that's being talked about, C906, is actually open source. Obviously, everybody gets a free license to RISC-V, and most implementations are proprietary. This doesn't mean there aren't any open implementations; C906 is one of many.
- stjohnswarts 5y agoIt's open source in that you can use the original code/design as you please in your implementation. I don't think anyone is stating that it's open source in terms of copyleft/gpl