[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1496984883.1929.29.camel@perches.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2017 22:08:03 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
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@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/25] lib, rtc: Print rtc_time via %pt[dt][rv]
On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 18:02 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 16:47 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > Recently I have noticed too many users of struct rtc_time that printing
> > > its content field by field.
> > >
> > > In this series I introduce %pt[dt][rv] specifier to make life a bit
> > > easier.
[]
> > > Most of the users currently are RTC drivers, thus the patch series is
> > > assumed to go via RTC tree.
> >
> > What I wonder about this series is how much
> > larger it makes a typical kernel and how
> > often multiple rtc clocks are built for a
> > single kernel?
>
> We may hide it under CONFIG_RTC_??? if we want to reduce kernel for
> non RTC cases.
Depends whether it is for rtc_time only
> > What is the size impact on an embedded kernel
> > that uses a single rtc driver?
>
> I would
You would what?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists