[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f71fd03d-e5a7-0e79-9273-367db2354777@wdc.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 09:31:17 -0800
From: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitriy Cherkasov <dmitriy@...-tech.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
"moderated list:ARM64 PORT (AARCH64 ARCHITECTURE)"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH v1 3/4] cpu-topology: Move cpu topology code to common
code.
On 12/3/18 9:16 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 03:28:19PM -0800, Atish Patra wrote:
>> Both RISC-V & ARM64 are using cpu-map device tree to describe
>> their cpu topology. It's better to move the relevant code to
>> a common place instead of duplicate code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/topology.h | 22 ---
>> arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 303 +-------------------------------------
>> drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 294 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/linux/arch_topology.h | 26 ++++
>> include/linux/topology.h | 1 +
>> 5 files changed, 325 insertions(+), 321 deletions(-)
>>
> From a quick look and diffstat, it looks like a simple move. However
> I would like to throw this at 0-day bot to test various build configurations
> so that it's not breaking anything. I can push to a branch in my git
> @kernel.org but not sure on the build coverage. Anyways will update
> with any results on build and testing on my side ASAP.
>
Thanks. It definitely need to rigorous build testing for different
configurations.
What is the best practice to trigger expansive build tests?
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org is in CC.
Regards,
Atish
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists