On Thu, Jul 02, 2026 at 08:40:24PM +0000, Yao Zi wrote: > On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 11:47:00AM -0600, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 11:17:58AM +0000, Yao Zi wrote: > > > > > From: Jiaxun Yang <[email protected]> > > > > > > Commit for directories, Kconfig, Makefile and headers > > > > > > Some of them are copied from linux, some of them are derived > > > from other architectures, the rest are wriiten on my own. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiaxun Yang <[email protected]> > > > Signed-off-by: Yao Zi <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > > > > Hi Heinrich, > > > > > > I kept the naming of CONFIG_ARCH_LA64 (instead of using the full name > > > ARCH_LOONGARCH64) since it's shorter, and we already have similar > > > CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I, and etc. in U-Boot. Is is okay for you? > > > > We should use CONFIG_LOONGARCH here, to mirror the kernel I think. The > > CONFIG_ARCH_ namespace in U-Boot maps more to the usage of CONFIG_ARCH_ > > in the kernel, for ARM (and ARM64) platforms rather than describing a > > CPU level architectural feature. > > Oops, to make it clear, we do have a CONFIG_LOONGARCH symbol to > indicate LoongArch platforms, and CONFIG_ARCH_LA64 is for > distinguishing LA64 with LA32 and LA32R variants which would be > introduced in the future, just like the case of CONFIG_ARCH_RV32I and > CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I. Does this make sense for you?
Ah, OK, yes, that makes sense, thanks for explaining. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
