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@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@xxxxxxx> >>> >>> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> 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 ? Regards, Sudeep [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/18/340 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
