On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Andy Shevchenko
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Rasmus Villemoes
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jun 08 2017, Andy Shevchenko [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Alexandre Belloni
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 08/06/2017 at 20:57:05 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Alexandre Belloni
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

Yeah, but the problem is to pass the reference. All dances around will
uglify the code.
(Obviously we can't pass timespec64/time64_t or anything longer than
32 bits as is in %p extension)

quoted

I like that this gets rid of some mm/dd/yy and other more or less random
format and ends up standardizing yyyy-mm-dd HH:MM:SS. However, I do
think %pt should take either ktime_t or timespec64 (obviously by
reference),

I will try to look in this direction.

sounds good.

quoted

Please don't give people the option of eliding either the time or the
date; I've spent too much time dealing with syslog files that don't
include the year in the timestamps.

I understand that, but see above.

When we pretty-print a ktime_t, we probably want to leave out the high
fields as well, as this often refers to a time interval, e.g. a few seconds.
Even for absolute values, the start of ktime_t is usually not the 1970
epoch but system boot, so we may not necessarily want the higher
fields. I hoped to find some inspiration in the 'date' man page, which
contains a lot of formatting options, but it's hard to translate that into
a useful format string within the constraints of %p flags in printk.

     Arnd