[PATCH v7 04/19] rtc: sun6i: Add support for linear day storage

[Andre Przywara]

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 04:07:55 +0800
kernel test robot <lkp at intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Andre,
> 
> I love your patch! Yet something to improve:
> 
> [auto build test ERROR on sunxi/sunxi/for-next]
> [also build test ERROR on v5.13-rc6]
> [cannot apply to lee-mfd/for-mfd-next mripard/sunxi/for-next next-20210617]
> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]
> 
> url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Andre-Przywara/arm64-sunxi-Initial-Allwinner-H616-SoC-support/20210617-022925
> base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sunxi/linux.git sunxi/for-next
> config: powerpc64-randconfig-c004-20210617 (attached as .config)
> compiler: powerpc-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.3.0
> reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
>         wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
>         chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
>         # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/b0bd86f86f42049c6e19e25460b042fca7a7901d
>         git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
>         git fetch --no-tags linux-review Andre-Przywara/arm64-sunxi-Initial-Allwinner-H616-SoC-support/20210617-022925
>         git checkout b0bd86f86f42049c6e19e25460b042fca7a7901d
>         # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>         COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-9.3.0 make.cross ARCH=powerpc64 
> 
> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp at intel.com>
> 
> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
> 
>    powerpc-linux-ld: drivers/rtc/rtc-sun6i.o: in function `sun6i_rtc_settime':
> >> rtc-sun6i.c:(.text.sun6i_rtc_settime+0x218): undefined reference to `__udivdi3'  

For the records, I am using div_u64() now, which compiles fine in both
ARM and arm64.
Also found some subtle bugs with the types used in that function on the
way.

Thanks dear bot for also caring about those "lesser" architectures ;-)

Cheers,
Andre