linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] ARM: bcm2835: Switch to use %ptT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200421130938.GN185537@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Apr 2020 16:09:38 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Cc:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        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 Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:53:58AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> 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()"?

Same comment as per previous patch (TL;DR: no, it can't).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko