================ @@ -0,0 +1,7343 @@ +/* + * xxHash - Extremely Fast Hash algorithm + * Header File + * Copyright (C) 2012-2023 Yann Collet + * + * BSD 2-Clause License (https://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php) ---------------- kbeyls wrote:
This is a license different from Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception. Therefore, the process described at https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#copyright-license-and-patents should be followed to check whether this is acceptable in this specific case. That being said, xxhash is already present under [llvm/lib/Support/xxhash.cpp](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/21eeca3db0341fef4ab4a6464ffe38b2eba5810c/llvm/lib/Support/xxhash.cpp#L163), as you pointed out in the [RFC](https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-emulated-pac/85557). Making sure we don't have multiple copies of non-Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception code would be preferable. I'll tag @beanz, as he had ideas about how to better structure vendored third party code in LLVM. I'm not sure if moving non-Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception licensed code to a run-time library (for the first time?) triggers new concerns. I'll note that other hashing algorithms, such as [Blake3](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/21eeca3db0341fef4ab4a6464ffe38b2eba5810c/llvm/include/llvm/Support/BLAKE3.h#L1) and [SipHash](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/21eeca3db0341fef4ab4a6464ffe38b2eba5810c/llvm/lib/Support/SipHash.cpp#L1), which are available under the Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception, are also already present in the LLVM Support library. Would one of these preferably-licensed hashing algorithms be a good fit for the hashing functionality needed for this use case? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133530 _______________________________________________ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
