On 22/07/2019 14:03, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 01:47:57PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 22/07/2019 12:25, Petr Mladek wrote:
>>> On Mon 2019-07-22 11:33:28, Marc Zyngier wrote:
printk currently relies on local_clock to time-stamp the kernel
message
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 01:47:57PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 22/07/2019 12:25, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Mon 2019-07-22 11:33:28, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> printk currently relies on local_clock to time-stamp the kernel
> >> messages. In order to allow the timestamping (and only that)
> >> to
On 22/07/2019 12:25, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Mon 2019-07-22 11:33:28, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> printk currently relies on local_clock to time-stamp the kernel
>> messages. In order to allow the timestamping (and only that)
>> to be overridden by architecture-specific code, let's declare
>> a new time
On Mon 2019-07-22 11:33:28, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> printk currently relies on local_clock to time-stamp the kernel
> messages. In order to allow the timestamping (and only that)
> to be overridden by architecture-specific code, let's declare
> a new timestamp_clock() function, which gets used by the
printk currently relies on local_clock to time-stamp the kernel
messages. In order to allow the timestamping (and only that)
to be overridden by architecture-specific code, let's declare
a new timestamp_clock() function, which gets used by the printk
code. Architectures willing to make use of this
5 matches
Mail list logo
