Hello Petr, Daniel,
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 15:36:11 +0100
Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue 2025-03-11 10:21:23, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
> > %pC and %pCn print the same string, and commit 900cca294425 ("lib/vsprintf:
> > add %pC{,n,r} format specifiers for clocks") introducing them does not
> > clarify any intended difference. It can be assumed %pC is a default for
> > %pCn as some other specifiers do, but not all are consistent with this
> > policy. Moreover there is now no other suffix other than 'n', which makes a
> > default not really useful.
> >
> > All users in the kernel were using %pC except for one which has been
> > converted. So now remove %pCn and all the unnecessary extra code and
> > documentation.
> >
> > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Makes sense. Looks and works well, so:
>
> Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx>
>
> Daniel, if I get it correctly, you have already taken the 1st patch.
> Would you mind to take also this patch using the same tree, please?
> Otherwise, we would need to coordinate pull requests in the upcoming
> merge window ;-)
I see none of these two patches in linux-next.
Anything I should do? Resend? Or just wait a bit more?
Best regards,
Luca
--
Luca Ceresoli, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
