[PATCH v2 07/16] LoongArch: lib: General routines

[Yao Zi]

On Thu, Jul 02, 2026 at 08:07:08AM -0600, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 02, 2026 at 10:24:28AM +0100, Jiaxun Yang wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, 1 Jul 2026, at 6:49 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 11:17:59AM +0000, Yao Zi wrote:
> > >
> > >> From: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang at flygoat.com>
> > >> 
> > >> Add some common library routines for the architecture.
> > >> 
> > >> Signed-off-by: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang at flygoat.com>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Yao Zi <me at ziyao.cc>
> > > [snip]
> > >> +#define CACHE_MAX_LEVEL		3
> > >> +#define CACHE_MAX_INDEX		6
> > >> +#define CACHE_OP		GENMASK(4, 3)
> > >> +#define  CACHE_INDEX_INVWB	0x1
> > >> +#define  CACHE_HIT_INVWB	0x2
> > >> +#define CACHE_INDEX		GENMASK(2, 0)
> > >
> > > I was expecting checkpatch.pl to catch the double space here, but it
> > > didn't. It did warn about a few other things in macros, which should be
> > > checked out at least. And that comment applies for the whole series,
> > > along with a manual check for other spacing issues, thanks!
> > 
> > Those style issues are mostly copied over Linux kernel counterparts, should
> > we leave them as is to ease kernel rebasing effort, or fix them for consistency
> > with rest of the U-Boot?
> 
> Ah, OK then yes, we can leave those if it's a match-up with the kernel,
> but should make note of that in the commit message when applicable, not
> just the cover letter. It will make finding that reasoning easier in the
> future.

Yes, most style issues are in files copied from the kernel side, before
sending v2, I do have a brief look and fix some of them (for example,
mixed TAB/space and multiple empty lines).

But the diff quoted here isn't copied from kernel side, it's written by
myself. I consider the double space meaningful since these two macros
are two possible values of CACHE_OP, and found similar styles in
tools/zynqmqimage.h (PART_ATTR_*) and kernel side, do you think it's
acceptable?

> -- 
> Tom

Regards,
Yao Zi