From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22746C43613 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 15:33:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00D1420652 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 15:33:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729294AbfFXPds (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 11:33:48 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:53502 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726263AbfFXPds (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 11:33:48 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 873E52B; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 08:33:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e107155-lin (e107155-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.42]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 50AD03F71E; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 08:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 16:33:38 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Russell King - ARM Linux admin Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Albert Ou , Anup Patel , Catalin Marinas , "David S. Miller" , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ingo Molnar , Jonathan Cameron , Linus Walleij , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Mark Rutland , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Morten Rasmussen , Otto Sabart , Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Walmsley , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Richard Fontana , Rob Herring , Thomas Gleixner , Will Deacon , Atish Patra , Sudeep Holla , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/7] arm: Use common cpu_topology structure and functions. Message-ID: <20190624153338.GA3762@e107155-lin> References: <20190617185920.29581-1-atish.patra@wdc.com> <20190617185920.29581-5-atish.patra@wdc.com> <20190619121057.GE1360@e107155-lin> <20190624150658.GA1623@e107155-lin> <20190624153033.3jpdd7vsekdiltmb@shell.armlinux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190624153033.3jpdd7vsekdiltmb@shell.armlinux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 04:30:33PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 04:06:58PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > 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 > > > > Signed-off-by: Atish Patra > > > > Tested-by: Sudeep Holla (on TC2) > > > > Reviewed-by : Sudeep Holla > > > > > > > > --- > > > > 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. > > I have no interest in the CPU topology code; as far as I know I have > no systems that are able to exercise this code in any way. Therefore, > I don't know this code, I have no way to test it, and so it is not > appropriate for me to ack patches for it. > I completely understand that and we can take care of testing. As along as you don't have objections to this, that should be fine I believe. -- Regards, Sudeep