Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Apr 2020 16:09:38 +0300 | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | 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
| |