Re: PRI_stime

[Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1592 bytes --]

On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 02:34 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 20.10.15 at 10:10, <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:

> > Personally I've never taken the time to familiarize myself with the
> > magnitude of hex numbers vs decimal numbers; so in the case of
> > time, I
> > could easily see that 10000000 nanoseconds is about 1ms; but I
> > don't
> > have a good sense of how long 0x1000000 nanoseconds is.  The fact
> > that
> > our times are based on base 10 instead of base 2 is I think as good
> > an
> > argument as any for leaving it as a decimal.
> 
Yep, for time, I personally prefer decimal too.

> Well, as long as the number of seconds the value represents is small,
> this indeed is a good argument for using dec. However, already
> when we get into the hour range we're talking about 12-digit values
> without any separators, and at least for me this means counting
> from either end to find a place where to put a mental separator. So
> if staying with dec, perhaps we should make these second based,
> i.e. <ssss>.<nnnnnnnnn>?
> 
This would be really useful, and I'd be fine with scheduling related
PRI_stime to look like this. I think I really like it, actually.

It's what we do already for console timestamps, in case "=boot" is
specified, isn't it?

Thanks and Regards,
Dario
-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)


[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel