Re: [PATCH]drivers:base:power:trace.c Add "UTC" Coordinated Universal Time to the printk.

["Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@gmail.com>]

On 06/13/2011 02:47 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, June 13, 2011, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>> On 06/12/2011 01:27 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Sunday, June 12, 2011, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>> On 06/12/2011 11:35 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, June 12, 2011, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>>>> On 06/12/2011 05:12 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thursday, June 09, 2011, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>>>>>> From: "Justin P. Mattock"<justinmattock@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> sounds stupid, but taking a glance at the time, and seeing the wrong time, or what seemed
>>>>>>>> wrong in dmesg, caused me to go into total check the time clock panic mode.. So the patch below adds:
>>>>>>>> "UTC" Coordinated Universal Time abreviation to the printk so people like me dont flip out over the time!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> before:
>>>>>>>> [    0.114915] Time:  1:47:03  Date: 06/09/11
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> after:
>>>>>>>> [    0.114728] Time:  5:46:02 UTC Date: 06/09/11
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I suspect the goal is to mark messages printed by the PM trace code so that
>>>>>>> they can be easily distinguished from messages from other sources to avoid
>>>>>>> confusion.  Why do you think it's a good idea to use the "UTC" string for
>>>>>>> this purpose?  The time printed in those messages need not be UTC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It would be better to simply print "RTC time: ..., date: ..." IMO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Rafael
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> well.. if thats better, then thats better.. over here(people that dont
>>>>>> know what RTC time is) would not get so confused with a simple UTC or
>>>>>> PDT or whatever the time zone is but if RTC is bettr, then its better.
>>>>>
>>>>> My point is we don't know this time is always UTC, so we rather shouldn't
>>>>> label it as UTC unconditionally, should we?
>>>>>
>>>>> Rafael
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> sounds good to me!!
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what you mean?
>>>
>>
>> with what you are saying "RTC" if anything.. rather than "UTC"
>
> So, it looks like you'd like the appended patch to be appiled?
>
> Rafael


whatever works best with you guys... I just tripped out on that, and 
created what I had sent out..
>
> ---
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki<rjw@sisk.pl>
> Subject: PM: Add "RTC" to PM trace time stamps to avoid confusion
>
> Some users are apparently confused by dmesg output from
> read_magic_time(), which looks like "real" time and date.
> Add the "RTC" string to time stamps printed by read_magic_time() to
> avoid that confusion.
>
> Reported-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki<rjw@sisk.pl>
> ---
>   drivers/base/power/trace.c |    2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/base/power/trace.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/base/power/trace.c
> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/base/power/trace.c
> @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ static unsigned int read_magic_time(void
>   	unsigned int val;
>
>   	get_rtc_time(&time);
> -	pr_info("Time: %2d:%02d:%02d  Date: %02d/%02d/%02d\n",
> +	pr_info("RTC time: %2d:%02d:%02d, date: %02d/%02d/%02d\n",
>   		time.tm_hour, time.tm_min, time.tm_sec,
>   		time.tm_mon + 1, time.tm_mday, time.tm_year % 100);
>   	val = time.tm_year;				/* 100 years */
>


Justin P. Mattock