Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 13:15:48 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
Cc: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>,
        David Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
        Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
        Robert Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>, Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@intel.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, devel@acpica.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robert Richter <rrichter@cavium.com>,
        David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] ACPI NUMA support for ARM64
Message-ID: <20160426121547.GL27312@arm.com>
References: <1461116439-22991-1-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>
 <20160425111338.GJ16065@arm.com>
 <571E4A2A.8070908@caviumnetworks.com>
 <571EFD1B.1070609@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <571EFD1B.1070609@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2009
Lines: 47

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 01:31:07PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2016/4/26 0:47, David Daney wrote:
> >On 04/25/2016 04:13 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> >>On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 06:40:25PM -0700, David Daney wrote:
> >>>From: David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
> >>>
> >>>Based on v16 of device-tree NUMA patch set for arm64 [1],this patch
> >>>set introduce the ACPI based configuration to provide NUMA
> >>>information.
> >>>
> >>>ACPI 5.1 already introduced NUMA support for ARM64, which can get the
> >>>NUMA domain information from SRAT and SLIT table, so parse those two
> >>>tables to get mappings from cpu/mem to numa node configuration and
> >>>system locality.
> >>
> >>Whilst I've queued the main NUMA series for arm64, I'd really like to
> >>see more movement on the generic header file cleanups that you posted
> >>separately:
> >>
> >>http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1456358528-24213-1-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com
> >>
> >
> >FWIW:  Those patches should still apply.  I am carrying them in my
> >development trees, and have not changed them in any way.

What's your plan for getting them merged?

> >>Given that this ACPI series already requires some significant cross-arch
> >>interaction (which is actually good!), perhaps extending the clean-up
> >>patches to encompass some of the ACPI bits might make sense, and we can
> >>get that queued as a pre-requisite.
> >
> >The cleanup patches you mention above are really independent of the ACPI
> >things.  I have applied them both before and after the ACPI patches, and
> >both seem to work.  With a quick perusal of the ACPI patches nothing
> >jumps out at me as being a candidate for inclusion in the header file
> >cleanup series.
> 
> I agree. My patch set is ACPI related enablement, cleanups and
> consolidations, it would be good to merge as a single patch set
> as it's self-contained.

Up to you. I just thought you might want to avoid having two sets of
cross-arch changes and the associated merging headaches that go with
that.

Will