linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 04/25] lib/vsprintf: Print time and date in human readable format via %pt

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 8 Jun 2017 21:02:15 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
        linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Guan Xuetao <gxt@...c.pku.edu.cn>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 04/25] lib/vsprintf: Print time and date in human
 readable format via %pt

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 6:33 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Andy Shevchenko
> <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andy Shevchenko
>>> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

>>> I really like the idea, and the implementation seems fine for this use case, but
>>> before we reserve %pt for rtc_time, could we discuss whether we want
>>> that for printing struct tm, struct timespec64, time64_t or ktime_t instead?
>>
>> How many users?
>
> It's hard to predict, I would assume we get more users once there is an
> easy way to print the time.

So, at least for now we can guess using existing users, right?

I don't check yet how to calculate those cases of time64_t,
timespec64, ktime_t and alike if they are about pretty ptintong time
and date.
I'm speculating that there are (almost) none.

>> For struct tm it's somelike 4 (which want to print its content).
>
> Good point. I notice that they all convert from time64_t or time_t into
> struct tm immediately before printing it, so we can scratch that one
> as long as there is a way to pretty-print a time64_t. We also don't
> need to print a time_t as we want to kill that one off anyway.
>
> If we only care about printing time64_t and rtc_time, we can easily
> use %pT for one and %pt for the other, but there may still be good
> reasons to print a timespec64 or ktime_t.

No need, we may still use 3rd/4th letter in the format for that.

%pt(t/d) time/date + whatever modifications, like raw, validate, timespec, etc.

's' for timespec64, for example.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko