From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com>
To: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 11:42:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <524E9BA9.4000506@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5239D26E.5090505@arm.com>
Hi Grant,
On 18/09/13 17:18, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> On 18/09/13 15:51, Grant Likely wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:53:03 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.Karkad=
aNagesha@arm.com> wrote:
>>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The cache bindings are generic and used by many other architectures
>>> apart from PPC. These patches fixes and move the existing definition
>>> of of_find_next_cache_node to DT common code.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Sudeep
>>
>> Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
>>
>> However, do you have a user for this function on other architectures
>> yet? I'd like to see a user for the function in the same patch series..
>>
>=20
> Yes I have posted an RFC[1] following this series implementing cacheinfo
> for ARM similar to x86 implementation. I was not sure if it's good idea
> to combine it as its still initial RFC version.
>=20
Do you prefer to have this a independent change or to go with the cache top=
ology
support patches[1] on ARM ?
Regards,
Sudeep
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/18/340
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
To: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
<Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
Grant Likely
<grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"linuxppc-dev-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org"
<linuxppc-dev-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org>,
Rob Herring <robherring2-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 11:42:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <524E9BA9.4000506@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5239D26E.5090505-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
Hi Grant,
On 18/09/13 17:18, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> On 18/09/13 15:51, Grant Likely wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:53:03 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The cache bindings are generic and used by many other architectures
>>> apart from PPC. These patches fixes and move the existing definition
>>> of of_find_next_cache_node to DT common code.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Sudeep
>>
>> Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>
>>
>> However, do you have a user for this function on other architectures
>> yet? I'd like to see a user for the function in the same patch series..
>>
>
> Yes I have posted an RFC[1] following this series implementing cacheinfo
> for ARM similar to x86 implementation. I was not sure if it's good idea
> to combine it as its still initial RFC version.
>
Do you prefer to have this a independent change or to go with the cache topology
support patches[1] on ARM ?
Regards,
Sudeep
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/18/340
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-04 10:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-18 10:53 [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-09-18 10:53 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-09-18 10:53 ` [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: remove big endianness assumption in of_find_next_cache_node Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-09-18 10:53 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-09-18 10:53 ` [PATCH 2/2] of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-09-18 10:53 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-10-31 5:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-10-31 5:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-10-31 10:32 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-10-31 10:32 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-11-01 8:16 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-11-01 8:16 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-09-18 14:51 ` [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core Grant Likely
2013-09-18 14:51 ` Grant Likely
2013-09-18 16:18 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-09-18 16:18 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-10-04 10:42 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha [this message]
2013-10-04 10:42 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-11-02 18:06 ` Grant Likely
2013-11-02 18:06 ` Grant Likely
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=524E9BA9.4000506@arm.com \
--to=sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=robherring2@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.