Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 5/5] xen/console: Traditional console timestamps including milliseconds

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2014-03-07 at 17:28 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Suggested-by: Don Slutz <dslutz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> CC: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>
> 
> ---
> 
> The change in arm is only for the sake of compilation - the function is a
> no-op.

Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>

> 
> v5: Correct check for null in wallclock_time()
> ---
>  docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown |    4 +++-
>  xen/arch/arm/time.c                 |    2 +-
>  xen/arch/x86/time.c                 |   10 +++++++---
>  xen/drivers/char/console.c          |   11 ++++++++++-
>  xen/include/xen/time.h              |    2 +-
>  5 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown 
> b/docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown
> index e437091..ced5eca 100644
> --- a/docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown
> +++ b/docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown
> @@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ cleared.  This allows a single port to be shared by two 
> subsystems
>  makes sense on its own.
>  
>  ### console\_timestamps
> -> `= none | date | boot`
> +> `= none | date | datems | boot`

I think someone (David V?) asked this earlier but I don't remember a
response: Why do we need to support multiple timestamp formats? Can't we
just pick one which has reasonable accuracy/information content and
stick with it?

Ian.


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