Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] [RFC] Traditional console timestamps including milliseconds

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>]

On 04/03/14 09:14, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 28.02.14 at 19:57, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>> --- a/xen/drivers/char/console.c
>> +++ b/xen/drivers/char/console.c
>> @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ enum con_timestamp_mode
>>  {
>>      TSM_NONE,          /* No timestamps */
>>      TSM_DATE,          /* [YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS] */
>> +    TSM_DATE_MS,       /* [YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS.mmmmmm] */
>>      TSM_SINCE_BOOT     /* [SSSSSS.mmmmmm] */
> Just ".mmm".
>
>> @@ -588,6 +592,11 @@ static void printk_start_of_line(const char *prefix)
>>              snprintf(tstr, sizeof(tstr), "[%04u-%02u-%02u %02u:%02u:%02u] ",
>>                       1900 + tm.tm_year, tm.tm_mon + 1, tm.tm_mday,
>>                       tm.tm_hour, tm.tm_min, tm.tm_sec);
>> +        else
>> +            snprintf(tstr, sizeof(tstr),
>> +                     "[%04u-%02u-%02u %02u:%02u:%02u.%06"PRIu64"] ",
> And on the same basis just '.%03"PRIu64"]'
>
>> +                     1900 + tm.tm_year, tm.tm_mon + 1, tm.tm_mday,
>> +                     tm.tm_hour, tm.tm_min, tm.tm_sec, nsec / 1000);
> And finally "nsec / 1000000".
>
> Or is the patch title wrong, and you meant microseconds (in which
> case the enumerator should be TSM_DATE_US)?
>
> Jan
>

The patch title was indeed wrong in context, although either
milliseconds or microseconds could be appropriate here; the time prefix
was already quite long and is somewhat uncomfortably long given the
extra 7 characters.

~Andrew