From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert Richter Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 00/10] arm64, numa: Add numa support for arm64 platforms Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 11:39:59 +0100 Message-ID: <20160220103959.GC4914@rric.localdomain> References: <1455930799-5371-1-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: David Daney , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , Will Deacon , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Frank Rowand , Catalin Marinas , Matt Fleming , "linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" , Ganapatrao Kulkarni , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , David Daney List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 20.02.16 09:20:05, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 20 February 2016 at 02:13, David Daney wrote: > > From: David Daney > > > > v11: > > - Dropped cleanup patches for other architectures, they will be > > submitted as a separate set after more testing. > > > > - Added patch set from Ard Biesheuvel that are needed to make > > the whole thing actually work. Previously this was a > > separate set. > > > > This series is out of date, unfortunately. The EFI init code is now > (as of v4.5-rc1) shared between ARM and arm64, which means that any > changes you make must be made on both sides. This applies to the split > between parsing the EFI dt nodes and performing the actual EFI init, > but also to the early_init_dt_add_memory_arch() changes. I am happy to > have a go at this, but first I need a clear statement from whoever > maintains that area that keeping memory nodes *just* for the > annotations (and otherwise ignore them) is the way forward (Rob? > Grant?) Wasn't there the approach to check for consistency between efi tables and devicetree? Thus, DT is actually not ignored but rather checked if it is in sync with efi tables. -Robert