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@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> 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" _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
