On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 11:42:49 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanage...@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.karkadanage...@arm.com> wrote: > >>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanage...@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.lik...@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. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
