All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com>,
	vkilari@codeaurora.org, Al Stone <ahs3@redhat.com>,
	Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com, Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	John Garry <joh>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache properties early
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:47:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180517154701.GA20281@e107155-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a64ed431-0f60-2711-4138-eeefc7ba2d8b@arm.com>

On 16/05/18 11:56, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> 
> On 15/05/18 20:32, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> wrote:
>>> On 05/11/2018 06:57 PM, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>>
>>>>   -     cache_size = of_get_property(this_leaf->of_node, propname, NULL);
>>>> +       cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
>>>>         if (cache_size)
>>>>                 this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1);
>>
>> Can't you switch to of_read_property_uXX() variant here?
>>
> 
> This patch is just changing the first argument to the calls. So if we
> need to change, it has to be separate patch.
> 
> Now, we can use of_property_read_u64() but is there any particular
> reason you mention that ? One reason I can see is that we can avoid
> making explicit of_get_property call. Just wanted to the motive before I
> can write the patch.
> 

Is below patch does what you were looking for ?

Regards,
Sudeep

--
>From 71f1c10ddb5915a92fa74d38a4e2406d0ab27845 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 13:45:53 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u64 instead of
 get_property,read_number

of_property_read_u64 searches for a property in a device node and read
a 64-bit value from it. Instead of using of_get_property to get the
property and then read 64-bit value using of_read_number, we can make
use of of_property_read_u64.

Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
---
 drivers/base/cacheinfo.c | 24 +++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
index 2880e2ab01f5..56715014f07b 100644
--- a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
+++ b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
@@ -74,22 +74,21 @@ static inline int get_cacheinfo_idx(enum cache_type type)
 static void cache_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np)
 {
 	const char *propname;
-	const __be32 *cache_size;
+	u64 cache_size;
 	int ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
 	propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].size_prop;
 
-	cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-	if (cache_size)
-		this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1);
+	if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &cache_size))
+		this_leaf->size = cache_size;
 }
 
 /* not cache_line_size() because that's a macro in include/linux/cache.h */
 static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
 				struct device_node *np)
 {
-	const __be32 *line_size;
+	u64 line_size;
 	int i, lim, ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
@@ -99,27 +98,26 @@ static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
 		const char *propname;
 
 		propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].line_size_props[i];
-		line_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-		if (line_size)
+		line_size = of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &line_size);
+		if (line_size) {
+			this_leaf->coherency_line_size = line_size;
 			break;
+		}
 	}
 
-	if (line_size)
-		this_leaf->coherency_line_size = of_read_number(line_size, 1);
 }
 
 static void cache_nr_sets(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np)
 {
 	const char *propname;
-	const __be32 *nr_sets;
+	u64 nr_sets;
 	int ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
 	propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].nr_sets_prop;
 
-	nr_sets = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-	if (nr_sets)
-		this_leaf->number_of_sets = of_read_number(nr_sets, 1);
+	if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &nr_sets))
+		this_leaf->number_of_sets = nr_sets;
 }
 
 static void cache_associativity(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf)
-- 
2.7.4

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com>,
	vkilari@codeaurora.org, Al Stone <ahs3@redhat.com>,
	Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com, Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>,
	austinwc@codeaurora.org, tnowicki@caviumnetworks.com,
	jhugo@codeaurora.org, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache properties early
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:47:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180517154701.GA20281@e107155-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a64ed431-0f60-2711-4138-eeefc7ba2d8b@arm.com>

On 16/05/18 11:56, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> 
> On 15/05/18 20:32, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> wrote:
>>> On 05/11/2018 06:57 PM, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>>
>>>>   -     cache_size = of_get_property(this_leaf->of_node, propname, NULL);
>>>> +       cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
>>>>         if (cache_size)
>>>>                 this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1);
>>
>> Can't you switch to of_read_property_uXX() variant here?
>>
> 
> This patch is just changing the first argument to the calls. So if we
> need to change, it has to be separate patch.
> 
> Now, we can use of_property_read_u64() but is there any particular
> reason you mention that ? One reason I can see is that we can avoid
> making explicit of_get_property call. Just wanted to the motive before I
> can write the patch.
> 

Is below patch does what you were looking for ?

Regards,
Sudeep

--
>From 71f1c10ddb5915a92fa74d38a4e2406d0ab27845 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 13:45:53 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u64 instead of
 get_property,read_number

of_property_read_u64 searches for a property in a device node and read
a 64-bit value from it. Instead of using of_get_property to get the
property and then read 64-bit value using of_read_number, we can make
use of of_property_read_u64.

Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
---
 drivers/base/cacheinfo.c | 24 +++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
index 2880e2ab01f5..56715014f07b 100644
--- a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
+++ b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
@@ -74,22 +74,21 @@ static inline int get_cacheinfo_idx(enum cache_type type)
 static void cache_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np)
 {
 	const char *propname;
-	const __be32 *cache_size;
+	u64 cache_size;
 	int ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
 	propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].size_prop;
 
-	cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-	if (cache_size)
-		this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1);
+	if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &cache_size))
+		this_leaf->size = cache_size;
 }
 
 /* not cache_line_size() because that's a macro in include/linux/cache.h */
 static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
 				struct device_node *np)
 {
-	const __be32 *line_size;
+	u64 line_size;
 	int i, lim, ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
@@ -99,27 +98,26 @@ static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
 		const char *propname;
 
 		propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].line_size_props[i];
-		line_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-		if (line_size)
+		line_size = of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &line_size);
+		if (line_size) {
+			this_leaf->coherency_line_size = line_size;
 			break;
+		}
 	}
 
-	if (line_size)
-		this_leaf->coherency_line_size = of_read_number(line_size, 1);
 }
 
 static void cache_nr_sets(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np)
 {
 	const char *propname;
-	const __be32 *nr_sets;
+	u64 nr_sets;
 	int ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
 	propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].nr_sets_prop;
 
-	nr_sets = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-	if (nr_sets)
-		this_leaf->number_of_sets = of_read_number(nr_sets, 1);
+	if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &nr_sets))
+		this_leaf->number_of_sets = nr_sets;
 }
 
 static void cache_associativity(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf)
-- 
2.7.4

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: sudeep.holla@arm.com (Sudeep Holla)
To: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v9 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache properties early
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:47:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180517154701.GA20281@e107155-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a64ed431-0f60-2711-4138-eeefc7ba2d8b@arm.com>

On 16/05/18 11:56, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> 
> On 15/05/18 20:32, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> wrote:
>>> On 05/11/2018 06:57 PM, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>>
>>>>   -     cache_size = of_get_property(this_leaf->of_node, propname, NULL);
>>>> +       cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
>>>>         if (cache_size)
>>>>                 this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1);
>>
>> Can't you switch to of_read_property_uXX() variant here?
>>
> 
> This patch is just changing the first argument to the calls. So if we
> need to change, it has to be separate patch.
> 
> Now, we can use of_property_read_u64() but is there any particular
> reason you mention that ? One reason I can see is that we can avoid
> making explicit of_get_property call. Just wanted to the motive before I
> can write the patch.
> 

Is below patch does what you were looking for ?

Regards,
Sudeep

--
>From 71f1c10ddb5915a92fa74d38a4e2406d0ab27845 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 13:45:53 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u64 instead of
 get_property,read_number

of_property_read_u64 searches for a property in a device node and read
a 64-bit value from it. Instead of using of_get_property to get the
property and then read 64-bit value using of_read_number, we can make
use of of_property_read_u64.

Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
---
 drivers/base/cacheinfo.c | 24 +++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
index 2880e2ab01f5..56715014f07b 100644
--- a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
+++ b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
@@ -74,22 +74,21 @@ static inline int get_cacheinfo_idx(enum cache_type type)
 static void cache_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np)
 {
 	const char *propname;
-	const __be32 *cache_size;
+	u64 cache_size;
 	int ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
 	propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].size_prop;
 
-	cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-	if (cache_size)
-		this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1);
+	if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &cache_size))
+		this_leaf->size = cache_size;
 }
 
 /* not cache_line_size() because that's a macro in include/linux/cache.h */
 static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
 				struct device_node *np)
 {
-	const __be32 *line_size;
+	u64 line_size;
 	int i, lim, ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
@@ -99,27 +98,26 @@ static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
 		const char *propname;
 
 		propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].line_size_props[i];
-		line_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-		if (line_size)
+		line_size = of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &line_size);
+		if (line_size) {
+			this_leaf->coherency_line_size = line_size;
 			break;
+		}
 	}
 
-	if (line_size)
-		this_leaf->coherency_line_size = of_read_number(line_size, 1);
 }
 
 static void cache_nr_sets(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np)
 {
 	const char *propname;
-	const __be32 *nr_sets;
+	u64 nr_sets;
 	int ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
 	propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].nr_sets_prop;
 
-	nr_sets = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-	if (nr_sets)
-		this_leaf->number_of_sets = of_read_number(nr_sets, 1);
+	if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &nr_sets))
+		this_leaf->number_of_sets = nr_sets;
 }
 
 static void cache_associativity(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf)
-- 
2.7.4

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: sudeep.holla@arm.com (Sudeep Holla)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v9 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache properties early
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:47:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180517154701.GA20281@e107155-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a64ed431-0f60-2711-4138-eeefc7ba2d8b@arm.com>

On 16/05/18 11:56, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> 
> On 15/05/18 20:32, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> wrote:
>>> On 05/11/2018 06:57 PM, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>>
>>>>   -     cache_size = of_get_property(this_leaf->of_node, propname, NULL);
>>>> +       cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
>>>>         if (cache_size)
>>>>                 this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1);
>>
>> Can't you switch to of_read_property_uXX() variant here?
>>
> 
> This patch is just changing the first argument to the calls. So if we
> need to change, it has to be separate patch.
> 
> Now, we can use of_property_read_u64() but is there any particular
> reason you mention that ? One reason I can see is that we can avoid
> making explicit of_get_property call. Just wanted to the motive before I
> can write the patch.
> 

Is below patch does what you were looking for ?

Regards,
Sudeep

--
>From 71f1c10ddb5915a92fa74d38a4e2406d0ab27845 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 13:45:53 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u64 instead of
 get_property,read_number

of_property_read_u64 searches for a property in a device node and read
a 64-bit value from it. Instead of using of_get_property to get the
property and then read 64-bit value using of_read_number, we can make
use of of_property_read_u64.

Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
---
 drivers/base/cacheinfo.c | 24 +++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
index 2880e2ab01f5..56715014f07b 100644
--- a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
+++ b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
@@ -74,22 +74,21 @@ static inline int get_cacheinfo_idx(enum cache_type type)
 static void cache_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np)
 {
 	const char *propname;
-	const __be32 *cache_size;
+	u64 cache_size;
 	int ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
 	propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].size_prop;
 
-	cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-	if (cache_size)
-		this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1);
+	if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &cache_size))
+		this_leaf->size = cache_size;
 }
 
 /* not cache_line_size() because that's a macro in include/linux/cache.h */
 static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
 				struct device_node *np)
 {
-	const __be32 *line_size;
+	u64 line_size;
 	int i, lim, ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
@@ -99,27 +98,26 @@ static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
 		const char *propname;
 
 		propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].line_size_props[i];
-		line_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-		if (line_size)
+		line_size = of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &line_size);
+		if (line_size) {
+			this_leaf->coherency_line_size = line_size;
 			break;
+		}
 	}
 
-	if (line_size)
-		this_leaf->coherency_line_size = of_read_number(line_size, 1);
 }
 
 static void cache_nr_sets(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np)
 {
 	const char *propname;
-	const __be32 *nr_sets;
+	u64 nr_sets;
 	int ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
 	propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].nr_sets_prop;
 
-	nr_sets = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-	if (nr_sets)
-		this_leaf->number_of_sets = of_read_number(nr_sets, 1);
+	if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &nr_sets))
+		this_leaf->number_of_sets = nr_sets;
 }
 
 static void cache_associativity(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf)
-- 
2.7.4

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-17 15:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 185+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-11 23:57 [PATCH v9 00/12] Support PPTT for ARM64 Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57 ` [PATCH v9 01/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: move cache_setup_of_node() Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57 ` [PATCH v9 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache properties early Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-15 17:15   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-15 17:15     ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-15 17:15     ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-15 19:32     ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-05-15 19:32       ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-05-15 19:32       ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-05-15 19:32       ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-05-16 10:56       ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-16 10:56         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-16 10:56         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-16 10:56         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-17 15:47         ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2018-05-17 15:47           ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-17 15:47           ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-17 15:47           ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-18 21:50           ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-05-18 21:50             ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-05-18 21:50             ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-05-18 21:50             ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-05-21  9:27             ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21  9:27               ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21  9:27               ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21  9:27               ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21 10:15               ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21 10:15                 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21 10:15                 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21 10:15                 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21 10:32       ` [PATCH] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u64 instead of get_property,read_number Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21 10:32         ` [PATCH] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u64 instead of get_property, read_number Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21 12:53         ` [PATCH v2] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u32 instead of get_property,read_number Sudeep Holla
2018-05-21 12:53           ` [PATCH v2] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u32 instead of get_property, read_number Sudeep Holla
2018-06-05 16:21           ` [PATCH v2] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u32 instead of get_property,read_number Andy Shevchenko
2018-06-05 16:21             ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-06-05 16:26             ` Sudeep Holla
2018-06-05 16:26               ` Sudeep Holla
2018-06-05 16:34               ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-06-05 16:34                 ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-05-17  6:54     ` [PATCH v9 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache properties early Greg KH
2018-05-17  6:54       ` Greg KH
2018-05-17  6:54       ` Greg KH
2018-05-17  9:08       ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-17  9:08         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-17  9:08         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-17  9:35         ` Greg KH
2018-05-17  9:35           ` Greg KH
2018-05-17  9:35           ` Greg KH
2018-05-11 23:57 ` [PATCH v9 03/12] cacheinfo: rename of_node to fw_token Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57 ` [PATCH v9 04/12] arm64/acpi: Create arch specific cpu to acpi id helper Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:57   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-14 14:41   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-14 14:41     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-14 14:41     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-11 23:58 ` [PATCH v9 05/12] ACPI/PPTT: Add Processor Properties Topology Table parsing Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-12 10:09   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-12 10:09     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-12 10:09     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-12 10:09     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-15 21:42     ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-15 21:42       ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-15 21:42       ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-15 21:42       ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-16  8:24       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-16  8:24         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-16  8:24         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-16  8:24         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-11 23:58 ` [PATCH v9 06/12] ACPI: Enable PPTT support on ARM64 Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58 ` [PATCH v9 07/12] drivers: base cacheinfo: Add support for ACPI based firmware tables Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58 ` [PATCH v9 08/12] arm64: " Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58 ` [PATCH v9 09/12] arm64: topology: rename cluster_id Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58 ` [PATCH v9 10/12] arm64: topology: enable ACPI/PPTT based CPU topology Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58 ` [PATCH v9 11/12] ACPI: Add PPTT to injectable table list Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-12 10:10   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-12 10:10     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-12 10:10     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-12 10:10     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-11 23:58 ` [PATCH v9 12/12] arm64: topology: divorce MC scheduling domain from core_siblings Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-11 23:58   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-17 17:05 ` [PATCH v9 00/12] Support PPTT for ARM64 Catalin Marinas
2018-05-17 17:05   ` Catalin Marinas
2018-05-17 17:05   ` Catalin Marinas
2018-05-29 10:48   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 10:48     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 10:48     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 10:48     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 11:14     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 11:14       ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 11:14       ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 11:14       ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 11:56       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 11:56         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 11:56         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 11:56         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 13:18         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 13:18           ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 13:18           ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 13:18           ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 15:08           ` Will Deacon
2018-05-29 15:08             ` Will Deacon
2018-05-29 15:08             ` Will Deacon
2018-05-29 15:08             ` Will Deacon
2018-05-29 15:51             ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 15:51               ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 15:51               ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 15:51               ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 17:08               ` Robin Murphy
2018-05-29 17:08                 ` Robin Murphy
2018-05-29 17:08                 ` Robin Murphy
2018-05-29 17:08                 ` Robin Murphy
2018-05-29 17:18                 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 17:18                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 17:18                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 17:18                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 17:31                 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 17:31                   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 17:31                   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 17:31                   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 20:16               ` Will Deacon
2018-05-29 20:16                 ` Will Deacon
2018-05-29 20:16                 ` Will Deacon
2018-05-29 20:16                 ` Will Deacon
2018-05-29 20:48                 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 20:48                   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 20:48                   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 20:48                   ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 21:52               ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 21:52                 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 21:52                 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 21:52                 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-30 13:24                 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-30 13:24                   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-30 13:24                   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-30 13:24                   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-05-29 15:23           ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 15:23             ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 15:23             ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 15:23             ` Jeremy Linton
2018-05-29 15:50           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 15:50             ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 15:50             ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-29 15:50             ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-05-30  8:52             ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-05-30  8:52               ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-05-30  8:52               ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-05-30  8:52               ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-06-05 13:55     ` [PATCH 1/3] Revert "arm64: topology: divorce MC scheduling domain from core_siblings" Sudeep Holla
2018-06-05 13:55       ` Sudeep Holla
2018-06-05 13:55       ` [PATCH 2/3] ACPI / PPTT: fix build when CONFIG_ACPI_PPTT is not enabled Sudeep Holla
2018-06-05 13:55         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-06-05 13:55       ` [PATCH 3/3] arm64: disable ACPI PPTT support temporarily Sudeep Holla
2018-06-05 13:55         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-06-05 14:09       ` [PATCH 1/3] Revert "arm64: topology: divorce MC scheduling domain from core_siblings" Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-06-05 14:09         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-06-05 14:12         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-06-05 14:12           ` Sudeep Holla
2018-06-04 15:12   ` [PATCH v9 00/12] Support PPTT for ARM64 Catalin Marinas
2018-06-04 15:12     ` Catalin Marinas
2018-06-04 15:12     ` Catalin Marinas

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180517154701.GA20281@e107155-lin \
    --to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=Mark.Rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=ahs3@redhat.com \
    --cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
    --cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=palmer@sifive.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=vkilari@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.