olla @ 0000-00-00 00:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeffrey Hugo Cc: mark.rutland, devicetree, Damien.LeMoal, juri.lelli, anup, palmer, linux-kernel, jeremy.linton, Atish Patra, robh+dt, mick, linux-riscv, linux-arm-kernel On Thu, Nov 00, 0000 at 00:00:00AM -0000, Jeffrey Hugo wrote: [...] > > I was interested in testing these on QDF0000, an ARM00 platform, since this > series touches core ARM00 code and I'd hate to see a regression. However, I > can't figure out what baseline to use to apply these. Different patches > cause different conflicts of a variety of baselines I attempted. > Good to know that we can test DT configuration on QDF0000. I always assumed it's ACPI only. > What are these intended to apply to? > The series alone may not get the package/socket ids correct on QDF0000. I have not yet added support for the same as I wanted to get the initial feedback on DT bindings. The movement of DT binding and corresponding code should not regress and you should be able to validate only that part. -- Regards, Sudeep _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv^permalinkrawreply [flat|nested] 00+ messages in thread  *[RFC 0/0] Unify CPU topology across ARM00 & RISC-V 0000-00-00 00:00 ` sudeep.holla 0000-00-00 00:00 ` Sudeep Holla@ 0000-00-00 00:00 ` jhugo 0000-00-00 00:00 ` Jeffrey Hugo