[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200416025358.GC30641@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 11:53:58 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] ARM: bcm2835: Switch to use %ptT
On (20/04/15 20:00), Andy Shevchenko wrote:
[..]
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/raspberrypi.c b/drivers/firmware/raspberrypi.c
> index da26a584dca0..a3e85186f8e6 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/raspberrypi.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/raspberrypi.c
> @@ -182,16 +182,10 @@ rpi_firmware_print_firmware_revision(struct rpi_firmware *fw)
> RPI_FIRMWARE_GET_FIRMWARE_REVISION,
> &packet, sizeof(packet));
>
> - if (ret == 0) {
> - struct tm tm;
> -
> - time64_to_tm(packet, 0, &tm);
> + if (ret)
> + return;
>
> - dev_info(fw->cl.dev,
> - "Attached to firmware from %04ld-%02d-%02d %02d:%02d\n",
> - tm.tm_year + 1900, tm.tm_mon + 1, tm.tm_mday,
> - tm.tm_hour, tm.tm_min);
> - }
> + dev_info(fw->cl.dev, "Attached to firmware from %ptT\n", &packet);
> }
So can this be instead:
struct rtc_time tm;
rtc_time64_to_tm(time, &tm);
dev_info(.... "%ptR", &tm);
?
If it can, then I'd probably say something like "can we then just use
rtc_time64_to_tm()"?
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists