From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,T_DKIM_INVALID, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFBC2ECDFB8 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:26:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62F4820850 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:26:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="WdZ8+fch" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 62F4820850 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arndb.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730922AbeGRPE3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 11:04:29 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f194.google.com ([209.85.208.194]:35890 "EHLO mail-lj1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730382AbeGRPE3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 11:04:29 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f194.google.com with SMTP id u7-v6so4278008lji.3 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:26:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=uAPBffkEP6hzJQhAgZpqROpzhoxqEnmHBZuEr7Cl3wY=; b=WdZ8+fchC6Z113PVUHm8Z9naJ1nCiwKfseZFDQUAi3Run0qD/RTJApljpR/kg5abfA uHBy4CwzP9VHHqmkbWRk9yd9mUJkxRQR2zKnjs06c5dKpXlia51XuZ+0OeBcoFl1C04z ekfiymTKpCdzJISClUqCc3Kpsuzn6knmcL+0nzphQYB7ByuhCJsFgHMQpCRdSe25/FW3 hV7d3fzf7/IsEyZxVH0RA1UPUBcYIbmfgZWxcqqWoOn7BEcnIcMclFB5OxYGxT9z8hXL ES6T3ujMpcBvL3JmOqJ0PTiEmgKi0VLFP6AdXftm7seimoo88PMXO5G/ae8M3f+60XFO vdkw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uAPBffkEP6hzJQhAgZpqROpzhoxqEnmHBZuEr7Cl3wY=; b=UAtO8jbA2+cpKj3GHa49tNhXADcVQ+23aN+aecnD8gSmnxrSBMrTzpKtFOUO6YHaY0 Dgp02gBAOKitTM8DLXY/1RL72BwKnA1OBAY+2LmbOorPoWNu0+cypzPI4Wrf6XTA2+sL 9LJ8zHx8TKjG6L5pBJqO4Qev/J/IbIf1umjw82XT60CkESZbo00smISw49vLF/PbGIQ+ kP5NBpcPA0dvH91jP/spM3418NiLZEePPDUS+K3+omwXvS29HFg2JWSJmasVg1ik4sWL pgVFBXMBeLTapwEJo0BJBffsc6Nc56a1+vUjDf6GwMB4j0VyA6MDMGApDyiCd+ghexZB 8QCg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEm3XmHIcBNlNDx4NQZWai4bLkKlqNVNKUJsiYAWFhaq8NKVUFb fmFToF3uo5K0CpzjOVOumPUtpitxtxzLYHzuV2o= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdkukUAXWv07c10bMFmRwDD1yD3JESRzyN5ZxZ+NlJRCBL6VXrKiy//UnNUi4fyqsF+dui8Pi7gxcTobWrTA24= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9f4d:: with SMTP id v13-v6mr4717212ljk.42.1531923977174; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:26:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:41c1:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:26:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20180619140229.3615110-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20180619140229.3615110-2-arnd@arndb.de> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:26:16 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: lPXZCupQPtFyc6aeOJ_BBq5zMR0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] [v2] m68k: mac: use time64_t in RTC handling To: Finn Thain Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Paul Mackerras , Michael Ellerman , Joshua Thompson , Mathieu Malaterre , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Greg Ungerer , linux-m68k , linuxppc-dev , Linux Kernel Mailing List , y2038 Mailman List , Meelis Roos , Andreas Schwab Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Finn Thain wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jul 2018, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> >> -static long via_read_time(void) >> +static time64_t via_read_time(void) >> { >> union { >> __u8 cdata[4]; >> - long idata; >> + __u32 idata; >> } result, last_result; >> + time64_t ret; > > ret isn't used. > >> int count = 1; >> >> via_pram_command(0x81, &last_result.cdata[3]); >> @@ -279,12 +280,8 @@ static long via_read_time(void) >> via_pram_command(0x89, &result.cdata[1]); >> via_pram_command(0x8D, &result.cdata[0]); >> >> - if (result.idata == last_result.idata) { >> - if (result.idata < RTC_OFFSET) >> - result.idata += 0x100000000ull; >> - >> - return result.idata - RTC_OFFSET; >> - } >> + if (result.idata == last_result.idata) >> + return (time64_t(result.idata) - RTC_OFFSET); >> > > Did you mean to write, > > return (time64_t)result.idata - RTC_OFFSET; > > ? Right, I should have at least tried to build it again. Arnd