* [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core
@ 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
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-09-18 10:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: devicetree, linuxppc-dev; +Cc: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
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
Sudeep KarkadaNagesha (2):
powerpc: remove big endianness assumption in of_find_next_cache_node
of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code.
arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h | 3 ---
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 31 -------------------------------
drivers/of/base.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/of.h | 2 ++
4 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
--
1.8.1.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: remove big endianness assumption in of_find_next_cache_node 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 2/2] of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 2013-09-18 14:51 ` [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core Grant Likely 2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-09-18 10:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: devicetree, linuxppc-dev; +Cc: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha, Rob Herring, Grant Likely From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com> Currently big endianness of the device tree data is assumed in of_find_next_cache_node for 'handle' when calling of_find_node_by_phandle. In preparation to move this function to common code, this patch fixes the endianness using 'be32_to_cpup' Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org> Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com> Signed-off-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com> --- arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c index b7634ce..09be275 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c @@ -778,7 +778,7 @@ struct device_node *of_find_next_cache_node(struct device_node *np) handle = of_get_property(np, "next-level-cache", NULL); if (handle) - return of_find_node_by_phandle(*handle); + return of_find_node_by_phandle(be32_to_cpup(handle)); /* OF on pmac has nodes instead of properties named "l2-cache" * beneath CPU nodes. -- 1.8.1.2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code. 2013-09-18 10:53 [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core 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 2013-10-31 5:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 2013-09-18 14:51 ` [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core Grant Likely 2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-09-18 10:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: devicetree, linuxppc-dev; +Cc: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha, Rob Herring, Grant Likely From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com> Since the definition of_find_next_cache_node is architecture independent, the existing definition in powerpc can be moved to driver/of/base.c Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org> Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com> Signed-off-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com> --- arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h | 3 --- arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 31 ------------------------------- drivers/of/base.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/linux/of.h | 2 ++ 4 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h index 7d0c7f3..bf09e5a 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h @@ -44,9 +44,6 @@ void of_parse_dma_window(struct device_node *dn, const __be32 *dma_window, extern void kdump_move_device_tree(void); -/* cache lookup */ -struct device_node *of_find_next_cache_node(struct device_node *np); - #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA extern int of_node_to_nid(struct device_node *device); #else diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c index 09be275..4432fd8 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c @@ -761,37 +761,6 @@ void __init early_init_devtree(void *params) *******/ /** - * of_find_next_cache_node - Find a node's subsidiary cache - * @np: node of type "cpu" or "cache" - * - * Returns a node pointer with refcount incremented, use - * of_node_put() on it when done. Caller should hold a reference - * to np. - */ -struct device_node *of_find_next_cache_node(struct device_node *np) -{ - struct device_node *child; - const phandle *handle; - - handle = of_get_property(np, "l2-cache", NULL); - if (!handle) - handle = of_get_property(np, "next-level-cache", NULL); - - if (handle) - return of_find_node_by_phandle(be32_to_cpup(handle)); - - /* OF on pmac has nodes instead of properties named "l2-cache" - * beneath CPU nodes. - */ - if (!strcmp(np->type, "cpu")) - for_each_child_of_node(np, child) - if (!strcmp(child->type, "cache")) - return child; - - return NULL; -} - -/** * of_get_ibm_chip_id - Returns the IBM "chip-id" of a device * @np: device node of the device * diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c index 865d3f6..b2cee3d 100644 --- a/drivers/of/base.c +++ b/drivers/of/base.c @@ -1884,3 +1884,34 @@ int of_device_is_stdout_path(struct device_node *dn) return of_stdout == dn; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_device_is_stdout_path); + +/** + * of_find_next_cache_node - Find a node's subsidiary cache + * @np: node of type "cpu" or "cache" + * + * Returns a node pointer with refcount incremented, use + * of_node_put() on it when done. Caller should hold a reference + * to np. + */ +struct device_node *of_find_next_cache_node(const struct device_node *np) +{ + struct device_node *child; + const phandle *handle; + + handle = of_get_property(np, "l2-cache", NULL); + if (!handle) + handle = of_get_property(np, "next-level-cache", NULL); + + if (handle) + return of_find_node_by_phandle(be32_to_cpup(handle)); + + /* OF on pmac has nodes instead of properties named "l2-cache" + * beneath CPU nodes. + */ + if (!strcmp(np->type, "cpu")) + for_each_child_of_node(np, child) + if (!strcmp(child->type, "cache")) + return child; + + return NULL; +} diff --git a/include/linux/of.h b/include/linux/of.h index f95aee3..c08c07e 100644 --- a/include/linux/of.h +++ b/include/linux/of.h @@ -226,6 +226,8 @@ static inline int of_get_child_count(const struct device_node *np) return num; } +/* cache lookup */ +extern struct device_node *of_find_next_cache_node(const struct device_node *); extern struct device_node *of_find_node_with_property( struct device_node *from, const char *prop_name); #define for_each_node_with_property(dn, prop_name) \ -- 1.8.1.2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code. 2013-09-18 10:53 ` [PATCH 2/2] of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-10-31 5:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 2013-10-31 10:32 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2013-10-31 5:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha; +Cc: Grant Likely, devicetree, linuxppc-dev, Rob Herring On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 11:53 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote: > From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com> > > Since the definition of_find_next_cache_node is architecture independent, > the existing definition in powerpc can be moved to driver/of/base.c > > Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> > Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org> > Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com> > Signed-off-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com> I've seen no follow up on that, I'm happy to stick it in powerpc-next with some other late stuff. Cheers, Ben. > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h | 3 --- > arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 31 ------------------------------- > drivers/of/base.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/of.h | 2 ++ > 4 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h > index 7d0c7f3..bf09e5a 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h > @@ -44,9 +44,6 @@ void of_parse_dma_window(struct device_node *dn, const __be32 *dma_window, > > extern void kdump_move_device_tree(void); > > -/* cache lookup */ > -struct device_node *of_find_next_cache_node(struct device_node *np); > - > #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA > extern int of_node_to_nid(struct device_node *device); > #else > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c > index 09be275..4432fd8 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c > @@ -761,37 +761,6 @@ void __init early_init_devtree(void *params) > *******/ > > /** > - * of_find_next_cache_node - Find a node's subsidiary cache > - * @np: node of type "cpu" or "cache" > - * > - * Returns a node pointer with refcount incremented, use > - * of_node_put() on it when done. Caller should hold a reference > - * to np. > - */ > -struct device_node *of_find_next_cache_node(struct device_node *np) > -{ > - struct device_node *child; > - const phandle *handle; > - > - handle = of_get_property(np, "l2-cache", NULL); > - if (!handle) > - handle = of_get_property(np, "next-level-cache", NULL); > - > - if (handle) > - return of_find_node_by_phandle(be32_to_cpup(handle)); > - > - /* OF on pmac has nodes instead of properties named "l2-cache" > - * beneath CPU nodes. > - */ > - if (!strcmp(np->type, "cpu")) > - for_each_child_of_node(np, child) > - if (!strcmp(child->type, "cache")) > - return child; > - > - return NULL; > -} > - > -/** > * of_get_ibm_chip_id - Returns the IBM "chip-id" of a device > * @np: device node of the device > * > diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c > index 865d3f6..b2cee3d 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/base.c > +++ b/drivers/of/base.c > @@ -1884,3 +1884,34 @@ int of_device_is_stdout_path(struct device_node *dn) > return of_stdout == dn; > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_device_is_stdout_path); > + > +/** > + * of_find_next_cache_node - Find a node's subsidiary cache > + * @np: node of type "cpu" or "cache" > + * > + * Returns a node pointer with refcount incremented, use > + * of_node_put() on it when done. Caller should hold a reference > + * to np. > + */ > +struct device_node *of_find_next_cache_node(const struct device_node *np) > +{ > + struct device_node *child; > + const phandle *handle; > + > + handle = of_get_property(np, "l2-cache", NULL); > + if (!handle) > + handle = of_get_property(np, "next-level-cache", NULL); > + > + if (handle) > + return of_find_node_by_phandle(be32_to_cpup(handle)); > + > + /* OF on pmac has nodes instead of properties named "l2-cache" > + * beneath CPU nodes. > + */ > + if (!strcmp(np->type, "cpu")) > + for_each_child_of_node(np, child) > + if (!strcmp(child->type, "cache")) > + return child; > + > + return NULL; > +} > diff --git a/include/linux/of.h b/include/linux/of.h > index f95aee3..c08c07e 100644 > --- a/include/linux/of.h > +++ b/include/linux/of.h > @@ -226,6 +226,8 @@ static inline int of_get_child_count(const struct device_node *np) > return num; > } > > +/* cache lookup */ > +extern struct device_node *of_find_next_cache_node(const struct device_node *); > extern struct device_node *of_find_node_with_property( > struct device_node *from, const char *prop_name); > #define for_each_node_with_property(dn, prop_name) \ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code. 2013-10-31 5:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2013-10-31 10:32 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 2013-11-01 8:16 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-10-31 10:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: grant.likely@linaro.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, rob.herring@calxeda.com Hi Ben, On 31/10/13 05:20, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 11:53 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote: >> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com> >> >> Since the definition of_find_next_cache_node is architecture independent= , >> the existing definition in powerpc can be moved to driver/of/base.c >> >> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> >> Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org> >> Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com> >> Signed-off-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com> >=20 > I've seen no follow up on that, I'm happy to stick it in powerpc-next > with some other late stuff. >=20 Thanks for the follow up. Grant wanted to see usage of this outside PPC and= I pointed him[0] to the RFC[1] I had posted to support cacheinfo on ARM. These patches are based on v3.12-rc1, let me know if you want me to rebase/repost on any particular version. Regards, Sudeep [0] http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg05174.html [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/18/340 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code. 2013-10-31 10:32 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-11-01 8:16 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2013-11-01 8:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha Cc: grant.likely@linaro.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, rob.herring@calxeda.com On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 10:32 +0000, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote: > Thanks for the follow up. Grant wanted to see usage of this outside PPC and I > pointed him[0] to the RFC[1] I had posted to support cacheinfo on ARM. > > These patches are based on v3.12-rc1, let me know if you want me to > rebase/repost on any particular version. I've applied them to powerpc-next Cheers, Ben. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core 2013-09-18 10:53 [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core 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 ` [PATCH 2/2] of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-09-18 14:51 ` Grant Likely 2013-09-18 16:18 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Grant Likely @ 2013-09-18 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha, devicetree, linuxppc-dev; +Cc: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:53:03 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@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.. g. > > Sudeep KarkadaNagesha (2): > powerpc: remove big endianness assumption in of_find_next_cache_node > of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code. > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/prom.h | 3 --- > arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 31 ------------------------------- > drivers/of/base.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/of.h | 2 ++ > 4 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > -- > 1.8.1.2 > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxppc-dev mailing list > Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org > https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core 2013-09-18 14:51 ` [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core Grant Likely @ 2013-09-18 16:18 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 2013-10-04 10:42 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-09-18 16:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Grant Likely Cc: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org On 18/09/13 15:51, Grant Likely wrote: > On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:53:03 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.Karkada= Nagesha@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 >=20 > Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> >=20 > 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. Regards, Sudeep [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/18/340 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core 2013-09-18 16:18 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-10-04 10:42 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 2013-11-02 18:06 ` Grant Likely 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-10-04 10:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha, Grant Likely Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.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.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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core 2013-10-04 10:42 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha @ 2013-11-02 18:06 ` Grant Likely 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Grant Likely @ 2013-11-02 18:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 11:42:49 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com> wrote: > 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@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.. > >> > > > > 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 ? Ben's already picked it up, so I'm fine with it. g. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-11-02 22:37 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-09-18 10:53 [PATCH 0/2] move of_find_next_cache_node to DT core 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 ` [PATCH 2/2] of: move definition of of_find_next_cache_node into common code Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 2013-10-31 5:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 2013-10-31 10:32 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 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 16:18 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 2013-10-04 10:42 ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha 2013-11-02 18:06 ` Grant Likely
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).