On Thu 2020-09-24 02:06:12, John Ogness wrote: > On 2020-09-23, Petr Mladek <[email protected]> wrote: > > diff --git a/kernel/printk/printk_ringbuffer.h > > b/kernel/printk/printk_ringbuffer.h > > index 0adaa685d1ca..09082c8472d3 100644 > > --- a/kernel/printk/printk_ringbuffer.h > > +++ b/kernel/printk/printk_ringbuffer.h > > @@ -14,7 +15,7 @@ > > */ > > struct printk_info { > > u64 seq; /* sequence number */ > > - u64 ts_nsec; /* timestamp in nanoseconds */ > > + struct ktime_timestamps ts; /* timestamps */ > > Until now struct printk_info has contained generic types. If we add > struct ktime_timestamps, we may start storing more than we need. For > example, if more (possibly internal) fields are added to struct > ktime_timestamps that printk doesn't care about. We may prefer to > generically and explicitly store the information we care about: > > u64 ts_mono; > u64 ts_boot; > u64 ts_real; > > Or create our own struct printk_ts to copy the fields of interest to.
I would like to have a structure if we have more timestamps. Honestly, printk-specific structure sounds like an overhead to me. How big is the chance that struct ktime_timestamps ts would get modified? It has been created for printk after all. That said, I could live with printk-specific structure. We might even need it if we need to store also local_clock(). Best Regards, Petr
