[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190624150658.GA1623@e107155-lin>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 16:06:58 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Otto Sabart <ottosabart@...erm.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Richard Fontana <rfontana@...hat.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/7] arm: Use common cpu_topology structure and
functions.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 01:10:57PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 11:59:17AM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
> > Currently, ARM32 and ARM64 uses different data structures to represent
> > their cpu topologies. Since, we are moving the ARM64 topology to common
> > code to be used by other architectures, we can reuse that for ARM32 as
> > well.
> >
> > Take this opprtunity to remove the redundant functions from ARM32 and
> > reuse the common code instead.
> >
> > To: Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
> > Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
> > Tested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com> (on TC2)
> > Reviewed-by : Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> >
> > ---
> > Hi Russell,
> > Can we get a ACK for this patch ? We are hoping that the entire
> > series can be merged at one go.
>
> It would be nice to get this in for v5.3 as it's almost there.
> Are you fine with these changes ?
>
Do you have any objections with this patch ? We plan to merge through
RISC-V tree, please let us know. It has been acked-by all the other
maintainers.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists