On Tue 2020-06-16 18:42:00, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-06-16 at 19:31 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > time64_t is 64-bit width type, we are not supposed to supply lesser ones
> > as in the case of rpi_firmware_print_firmware_revision() after the commit
> > 4a60f58ee002 ("ARM: bcm2835: Switch to use %ptT"). Use temporary variable
> > of time64_t type to correctly handle lesser types.
> >
> > Fixes: 4a60f58ee002 ("ARM: bcm2835: Switch to use %ptT")
> > Reported-by: Stefan Wahren <wahre...@gmx.net>
> > Reported-by: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulie...@suse.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com>
> > Cc: Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org>
> > Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhat...@gmail.com>
> > ---
>
> Reviewed-by: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulie...@suse.de>
> Tested-by: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulie...@suse.de>
Revieved-by: Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com>
> If this doesn't fit the printk tree I don't mind taking it trough the rpi soc
> tree.
>
> I'll also update the MAINTAINERS file so the firmware driver isn't orphaned.
I agree with Sergey that this should better go via SOC tree.
That said, feel free to ask to take it via printk tree. It has caused
the regression after all ;-)
Best Regards,
Petr
