Groups > linux.kernel > #1661921

Re: [PATCH v1 00/25] lib, rtc: Print rtc_time via %pt[dt][rv]

From	Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH v1 00/25] lib, rtc: Print rtc_time via %pt[dt][rv]
Date	2017-06-09 07:10 +0200
Message-ID	<tQklk-5JZ-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<tQ5Z1-4WL-35@gated-at.bofh.it> <tQ74J-5AT-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tQ7ep-5TV-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 18:02 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 16:47 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > Recently I have noticed too many users of struct rtc_time that printing
> > > its content field by field.
> > > 
> > > In this series I introduce %pt[dt][rv] specifier to make life a bit
> > > easier.
[]
> > > Most of the users currently are RTC drivers, thus the patch series is
> > > assumed to go via RTC tree.
> > 
> > What I wonder about this series is how much
> > larger it makes a typical kernel and how
> > often multiple rtc clocks are built for a
> > single kernel?
> 
> We may hide it under CONFIG_RTC_??? if we want to reduce kernel for
> non RTC cases.

Depends whether it is for rtc_time only

> > What is the size impact on an embedded kernel
> > that uses a single rtc driver?
> 
> I would

You would what?

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH v1 00/25] lib, rtc: Print rtc_time via %pt[dt][rv] Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> - 2017-06-08 16:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v1 00/25] lib, rtc: Print rtc_time via %pt[dt][rv] Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-06-08 17:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v1 00/25] lib, rtc: Print rtc_time via %pt[dt][rv] Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 17:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v1 00/25] lib, rtc: Print rtc_time via %pt[dt][rv] Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-06-09 07:10 +0200

csiph-web