On Thu, 2023-01-12 at 13:38 +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > There's no reason for secvar_operations to use uint64_t vs the more > common kernel type u64. > > The types are compatible, but they require different printk format > strings which can lead to confusion. > > Change all the secvar related routines to use u64. > > Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au>
We're going to include this patch in the next revision of our dynamic key management series. -- Andrew Donnellan OzLabs, ADL Canberra a...@linux.ibm.com IBM Australia Limited
