From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
Cc: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>,
David Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
Robert Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>,
Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@intel.com>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
devel@acpica.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Robert Richter <rrichter@cavium.com>,
David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] ACPI NUMA support for ARM64
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 14:35:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160426133500.GQ27312@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <571F671D.70401@linaro.org>
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 09:03:25PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2016/4/26 20:15, Will Deacon wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 01:31:07PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >>On 2016/4/26 0:47, David Daney wrote:
> >>>On 04/25/2016 04:13 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> >>>>On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 06:40:25PM -0700, David Daney wrote:
> >>>>>From: David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Based on v16 of device-tree NUMA patch set for arm64 [1],this patch
> >>>>>set introduce the ACPI based configuration to provide NUMA
> >>>>>information.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>ACPI 5.1 already introduced NUMA support for ARM64, which can get the
> >>>>>NUMA domain information from SRAT and SLIT table, so parse those two
> >>>>>tables to get mappings from cpu/mem to numa node configuration and
> >>>>>system locality.
> >>>>
> >>>>Whilst I've queued the main NUMA series for arm64, I'd really like to
> >>>>see more movement on the generic header file cleanups that you posted
> >>>>separately:
> >>>>
> >>>>http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1456358528-24213-1-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>FWIW: Those patches should still apply. I am carrying them in my
> >>>development trees, and have not changed them in any way.
> >
> >What's your plan for getting them merged?
>
> This patch set touches lots of ACPI related file in arch/x86,
> arch/ia64, and drivers/acpi/ (also arch/arm64), I think it can be
> merged via ACPI tree by Rafael with your ack to ARM64 code, does
> it make sense?
It doesn't touch anything in drivers/acpi/... are you following the link
above?
> >>>>Given that this ACPI series already requires some significant cross-arch
> >>>>interaction (which is actually good!), perhaps extending the clean-up
> >>>>patches to encompass some of the ACPI bits might make sense, and we can
> >>>>get that queued as a pre-requisite.
> >>>
> >>>The cleanup patches you mention above are really independent of the ACPI
> >>>things. I have applied them both before and after the ACPI patches, and
> >>>both seem to work. With a quick perusal of the ACPI patches nothing
> >>>jumps out at me as being a candidate for inclusion in the header file
> >>>cleanup series.
> >>
> >>I agree. My patch set is ACPI related enablement, cleanups and
> >>consolidations, it would be good to merge as a single patch set
> >>as it's self-contained.
> >
> >Up to you. I just thought you might want to avoid having two sets of
> >cross-arch changes and the associated merging headaches that go with
> >that.
>
> Good point, as I suggested above, it can go with ACPI tree if it's ok
> to you and Rafael. The problem we have now is that dt based core NUMA
> support for ARM64 is queued in your tree, that would be the headache.
Sorry, but if you wanted me *not* to queue the patches, then you should
have said so (similarly, if you wanted a stable branch). I'm not rebasing
our for-next/core branch now.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-26 13:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-20 1:40 [PATCH v5 00/14] ACPI NUMA support for ARM64 David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 01/14] acpi, numa: Use pr_fmt() instead of printk David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 02/14] acpi, numa: Replace ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT() with pr_debug() David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 03/14] acpi, numa: remove duplicate NULL check David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 04/14] acpi, numa: Move acpi_numa_arch_fixup() to ia64 only David Daney
2016-04-26 5:15 ` Hanjun Guo
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 05/14] acpi, numa: move acpi_numa_slit_init() to drivers/acpi/numa.c David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 06/14] arm64, numa: rework numa_add_memblk() David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 07/14] x86, acpi, numa: cleanup acpi_numa_processor_affinity_init() David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 08/14] acpi, numa: move bad_srat() and srat_disabled() to drivers/acpi/numa.c David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 09/14] acpi, numa: remove unneeded acpi_numa=1 David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 10/14] acpi, numa: Move acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init() to drivers/acpi/numa.c David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 11/14] acpi, numa, srat: Improve SRAT error detection and add messages David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 12/14] arm64, acpi, numa: NUMA support based on SRAT and SLIT David Daney
2016-04-20 7:41 ` Dennis Chen
2016-04-20 8:31 ` Ganapatrao Kulkarni
2016-04-20 16:29 ` David Daney
2016-04-21 10:06 ` Dennis Chen
2016-04-27 1:14 ` David Daney
2016-04-27 4:04 ` Hanjun Guo
2016-04-27 11:37 ` Dennis Chen
2016-04-27 15:40 ` David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 13/14] acpi, numa: Enable ACPI based NUMA on ARM64 David Daney
2016-04-20 1:40 ` [PATCH v5 14/14] arm64, acpi, numa: Default enable ACPI_NUMA with NUMA David Daney
2016-04-25 11:13 ` [PATCH v5 00/14] ACPI NUMA support for ARM64 Will Deacon
2016-04-25 16:47 ` David Daney
2016-04-26 5:31 ` Hanjun Guo
2016-04-26 12:15 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-26 13:03 ` Hanjun Guo
2016-04-26 13:35 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2016-04-26 16:48 ` David Daney
2016-04-27 1:49 ` Hanjun Guo
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=20160426133500.GQ27312@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=Marc.Zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=david.daney@cavium.com \
--cc=ddaney.cavm@gmail.com \
--cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=devel@acpica.org \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
--cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
--cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lv.zheng@intel.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=robert.moore@intel.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=rrichter@cavium.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).