Misrepresented Licensing

It seems that several files based on aarch64 code has this license notice which seems to be a rare variant of BSD-3-Clause with the second clause removed, no disclaimer and some wording changed and GPL dual-licensing:

/*
 * crt0-efi-aarch64.S - PE/COFF header for AArch64 EFI applications
 *
 * Copyright (C) 2014 Linaro Ltd. <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
 *
 * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
 * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
 * are met:
 * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
 *    notice and this list of conditions, without modification.
 * 2. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products
 *    derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
 *
 * Alternatively, this software may be distributed under the terms of the
 * GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation;
 * either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
 */

Some, but not all files with this license notice incorrectly label this notice as GPL-2.0-or-later OR BSD-2-Clause. This is not licensed under BSD-2-Clause. This should be updated to affect the reality.

inc/protocol/efidbg.h seems to be licensed under BSD-4-Clause.

inc/efipoint.h seems to be licensed under the MIT license.

inc/efiui.h is Copyright (C) 200 Intel Corporation which seems to suggest it's in the public domain 😜

efilib license does have an extra disclaimer not included in BSD-2-Clause, however since it refers to the EFI Spec and other information on the website it was originally distributed on, I believe it doesn't apply to this software and therefore doesn't put any extra restrictions on this project, but IANAL. I've labeled the efilib license as BSD-2-Clause but since the copyright notice has to be preserved, the extra sentence added to BSD-2-Clause has to be kept.

Given all the complexities of licensing in this project, I suggest a thorough review of all license notices in this repo and noting the SPDX identifier of the whole project in docs/README.packaging.md for us packagers. Here's my attempt at it, which might not be entirely correct so please triple check:

SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-2-Clause-Patent AND BSD-3-Clause AND BSD-4-Clause AND GPL-2.0-or-later AND MIT AND LicenseRef-scancode-bsd-no-disclaimer-unmodified

this is the license identifier according to fedora, I couldn't find the GPL-2.0-only files but maybe they were removed/relicensed between the version on fedora and master:

SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-2-Clause-Patent AND BSD-3-Clause AND BSD-4-Clause AND GPL-2.0-or-later AND GPL-2.0-only

Start by auditing the license notices in the repository, especially the files named in the issue: inc/protocol/efidbg.h, inc/efipoint.h, and inc/efiui.h. Compare each notice with the stated SPDX identifiers and review docs/README.packaging.md. Done means the notices are accurately classified and the documentation records the project's complete, verified SPDX expression.