[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1707191426060.2286@nanos>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 14:28:31 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
cc: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...roid.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, rjw@...ysocki.net,
len.brown@...el.com, pavel@....cz, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
a.zummo@...ertech.it, alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com,
linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, andy.shevchenko@...il.com,
Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...gle.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thierry Strudel <tstrudel@...gle.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] time: rtc-lib: Add rtc_show_time(const char
*prefix_msg)
On Wed, 19 Jul 2017, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> On 07/19/2017 03:23 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > There is another option to remedy this and the dmesg tooling issues:
> >
> > Instead of switching the time stamps in dmesg to a different clock we might
> > as well have an optional secondary timestamp. So instead of:
> >
> > [ 341.590930] wlan0: associated
> >
> > you would get:
> >
> > [ 341.590930] [ sec.usec] wlan0: associated
> >
> > where the second time stamp would be CLOCK_REALTIME/BOOTTIME.
> >
> > That should also solve Prarits problem, hmm?
>
> It would but I would prefer a single time stamp be printed than two. I think
> two timestamps is adding confusion to the output from a end-users point of view.
Fair enough. I came up with that idea when I looked at the old thread. The
discussion about tools (e.g. dmesg) dried out at some point and looked
unresolved.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists