From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from service87.mimecast.com (service87.mimecast.com [91.220.42.44]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AC352C03D8 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 20:42:45 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <524E9BA9.4000506@arm.com> Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 11:42:49 +0100 From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha , Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core References: <1379501585-12532-1-git-send-email-Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com> <20130918145116.D53A5C42CDF@trevor.secretlab.ca> <5239D26E.5090505@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <5239D26E.5090505@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Rob Herring , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , 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 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.. >> >=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