On Thu, Jul 02, 2026 at 08:39:44PM +0000, Yao Zi wrote: > On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 11:39:40AM -0600, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 11:17:55AM +0000, Yao Zi wrote: > > > > > From: Jiaxun Yang <[email protected]> > > > > > > For LoongArch the start of the image is not the entry > > > point to the image. > > > > > > We refactor the code base to allow entry point to be > > > supplied by setup_booti. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiaxun Yang <[email protected]> > > > Signed-off-by: Yao Zi <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > > > > Changed from v1 > > > - Correct type of "entry" argument for RISC-V and sandbox > > > > Can you please also provide a link to > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/arch/loongarch/booting.html which > > probably should cover this, but I'm not entirely sure does? > > It does in a non-obvious way, quoting part of the image header, > > u32 MZ_MAGIC /* "MZ", MS-DOS header */ > u32 res0 = 0 /* Reserved */ > u64 kernel_entry /* Kernel entry point */ > > comparing it to the RISC-V version[1], > > u32 code0; /* Executable code */ > u32 code1; /* Executable code */ > u64 text_offset; /* Image load offset, little endian */ > u64 image_size; /* Effective Image size, little endian */ > > The start of LoongArch image isn't marked as executable.
Perhaps it's worth clarifying in the kernel documentation then? Thanks. > Additionally, should I include the URL of "latest" kernel documentation, > or using a link with explicit kernel version (e.g. [2]) to ensure the > content doesn't change or become 404 over time? Ah, true, yes, lets point at the v7.1 tag, or whatever you're testing this against, to cover future changes if any. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
