linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 00/25] lib, rtc: Print rtc

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]

Message-ID: <1500400523.29303.92.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jul 2017 20:55:23 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
        linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/25] lib, rtc: Print rtc_time via %pt[dt][rv]

On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 10:50 -0700, Joe Perches 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.
> 
> Hey Andy.
> 
> I just saw a patch with a printk for rtc time from Mark Salyzyn.
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/7/18/885

Same!

> Any idea if you want to push this extension?

Yes, just really lack of time for everything.

I like the idea to make it conditional (config BLABLABLA). It will
address some comments about footprint for no users.

> I like the concept and still think it could be extended a bit more.
> 
> from: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/6/8/1134
> 
> My preference would be for %pt[type]<output style>
> where <type> is mandatory and could be:
> 
>         r for struct rtc_time
>         6 for time64_t
>         k for ktime_t
>         T for struct timespec64
>         etc

I dunno about this.

However, I like this more than do conversion in each case where input
reference has different type.

> and <output style> has an unspecified default of
> YYYY-MM-DD:hh:mm:ss

I'm against this, sorry. Too many variations for almost no use (users).

> Perhaps use the "date" formats without the leading
> % uses for <output style> for additional styles.

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy