On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 12:57 -0700, Mark Salyzyn wrote:It would probably need to take struct timespec64 as an argument. Pass by structure might be difficult to swallow, so pass by pointer?
On 07/18/2017 10:50 AM, Joe Perches wrote:As a separate modifier, yes.
On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 16:47 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm:ss.nnnnnnnnn ?
Recently I have noticed too many users of struct rtc_time thatHey Andy.
printing
its content field by field.
In this series I introduce %pt[dt][rv] specifier to make life a
bit
easier.
I just saw a patch with a printk for rtc time from Mark Salyzyn.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/7/18/885
Any idea if you want to push this extension?
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
and <output style> has an unspecified default of
YYYY-MM-DD:hh:mm:ss
Perhaps use the "date" formats without the leading
% uses for <output style> for additional styles.
See my answer to subthread in patch 4.