[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.21.1807222145330.56@nippy.intranet>
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 21:56:07 +1000 (AEST)
From: Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Joshua Thompson <funaho@...ai.org>,
Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Greg Ungerer <gerg@...ux-m68k.org>,
linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
y2038 Mailman List <y2038@...ts.linaro.org>,
Meelis Roos <mroos@...ux.ee>,
Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] [v2] m68k: mac: use time64_t in RTC handling
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018, I wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> > I'd suggest we do it like below to make it consistent with the rest
> > again, using the 1904..2040 range of dates and no warning for invalid
> > dates.
> >
> > If you agree, I'll send that as a proper patch.
> >
>
> Geert may instead wish to fixup or revert the patch he has committed
> already...
Geert, how do you want to handle this?
Do you want a fixup patch or a v3 patch with the WARN_ON and the other two
issues addressed?
I'm willing to send either one if Arnd is okay with that. I'd really like
to resolve this before the merge window opens, since my PMU patch series
is affected.
--
Powered by blists - more mailing lists