From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 17:18:54 +0100 Message-ID: <5239D26E.5090505@arm.com> References: <1379501585-12532-1-git-send-email-Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com> <20130918145116.D53A5C42CDF@trevor.secretlab.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130918145116.D53A5C42CDF-WNowdnHR2B42iJbIjFUEsiwD8/FfD2ys@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Grant Likely Cc: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha , "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linuxppc-dev-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 18/09/13 15:51, Grant Likely wrote: > On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:53:03 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote: >> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha >> >> 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 > > 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. 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