2018-12-04 09:33:43

by yuankuiz

Subject: [PATCH] rtc: proc: printf using alarm for alrm

Hi,

From 549bae59445c5ec67dd6a46f3ea4f58966d40c9b

Current the struct rtc_wkalrm is dumped as
"alrm_" by printing converted from the struct
name of "alrm.*" directly. Shall we use the
"alarm *" to replace the "alrm_*" during this
dumping?

Signed-off-by: John Zhao <[email protected]>
---
drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c
index a9dd921..d4a3c91 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ static int rtc_proc_show(struct seq_file *seq, void
*offset)

err = rtc_read_alarm(rtc, &alrm);
if (err == 0) {
- seq_printf(seq, "alrm_time\t: ");
+ seq_printf(seq, "alarm time\t: ");
if ((unsigned int)alrm.time.tm_hour <= 24)
seq_printf(seq, "%02d:", alrm.time.tm_hour);
else
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static int rtc_proc_show(struct seq_file *seq, void
*offset)
else
seq_printf(seq, "**\n");

- seq_printf(seq, "alrm_date\t: ");
+ seq_printf(seq, "alarm date\t: ");
if ((unsigned int)alrm.time.tm_year <= 200)
seq_printf(seq, "%04d-", alrm.time.tm_year + 1900);
else
@@ -85,9 +85,9 @@ static int rtc_proc_show(struct seq_file *seq, void
*offset)
seq_printf(seq, "%02d\n", alrm.time.tm_mday);
else
seq_printf(seq, "**\n");
- seq_printf(seq, "alarm_IRQ\t: %s\n",
+ seq_printf(seq, "alarm IRQ\t: %s\n",
alrm.enabled ? "yes" : "no");
- seq_printf(seq, "alrm_pending\t: %s\n",
+ seq_printf(seq, "alarm pending\t: %s\n",
alrm.pending ? "yes" : "no");
seq_printf(seq, "update IRQ enabled\t: %s\n",
(rtc->uie_rtctimer.enabled) ? "yes" : "no");
--
2.7.4

2018-12-06 07:23:54

by yuankuiz

Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: proc: printf using alarm for alrm

Hi,

Kindly, this format change formats the rtc dump from:
alrm_time : 00:00:00
alrm_date : 1970-01-01
alarm_IRQ : no
alrm_pending : no

to:
alarm time : 00:00:00
alarm date : 1970-01-01
alarm IRQ : no
alarm pending : no

Thanks,
BR//John Zhao

On 2018-12-04 05:29 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From 549bae59445c5ec67dd6a46f3ea4f58966d40c9b
>
> Current the struct rtc_wkalrm is dumped as
> "alrm_" by printing converted from the struct
> name of "alrm.*" directly. Shall we use the
> "alarm *" to replace the "alrm_*" during this
> dumping?
>
> Signed-off-by: John Zhao <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c
> index a9dd921..d4a3c91 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c
> @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ static int rtc_proc_show(struct seq_file *seq, void
> *offset)
>
> err = rtc_read_alarm(rtc, &alrm);
> if (err == 0) {
> - seq_printf(seq, "alrm_time\t: ");
> + seq_printf(seq, "alarm time\t: ");
> if ((unsigned int)alrm.time.tm_hour <= 24)
> seq_printf(seq, "%02d:", alrm.time.tm_hour);
> else
> @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static int rtc_proc_show(struct seq_file *seq, void
> *offset)
> else
> seq_printf(seq, "**\n");
>
> - seq_printf(seq, "alrm_date\t: ");
> + seq_printf(seq, "alarm date\t: ");
> if ((unsigned int)alrm.time.tm_year <= 200)
> seq_printf(seq, "%04d-", alrm.time.tm_year + 1900);
> else
> @@ -85,9 +85,9 @@ static int rtc_proc_show(struct seq_file *seq, void
> *offset)
> seq_printf(seq, "%02d\n", alrm.time.tm_mday);
> else
> seq_printf(seq, "**\n");
> - seq_printf(seq, "alarm_IRQ\t: %s\n",
> + seq_printf(seq, "alarm IRQ\t: %s\n",
> alrm.enabled ? "yes" : "no");
> - seq_printf(seq, "alrm_pending\t: %s\n",
> + seq_printf(seq, "alarm pending\t: %s\n",
> alrm.pending ? "yes" : "no");
> seq_printf(seq, "update IRQ enabled\t: %s\n",
> (rtc->uie_rtctimer.enabled) ? "yes" : "no");

2018-12-06 20:39:36

by Alexandre Belloni

Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: proc: printf using alarm for alrm

On 06/12/2018 15:22:51+0800, [email protected] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Kindly, this format change formats the rtc dump from:
> alrm_time : 00:00:00
> alrm_date : 1970-01-01
> alarm_IRQ : no
> alrm_pending : no
>
> to:
> alarm time : 00:00:00
> alarm date : 1970-01-01
> alarm IRQ : no
> alarm pending : no
>

Yes, and this would break the ABI as this file is in procfs. This is not
something I'm willing to do, especially since this file has been
deprecated since 2006.

> Thanks,
> BR//John Zhao
>
> On 2018-12-04 05:29 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > From 549bae59445c5ec67dd6a46f3ea4f58966d40c9b
> >
> > Current the struct rtc_wkalrm is dumped as
> > "alrm_" by printing converted from the struct
> > name of "alrm.*" directly. Shall we use the
> > "alarm *" to replace the "alrm_*" during this
> > dumping?
> >
> > Signed-off-by: John Zhao <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c | 8 ++++----
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c
> > index a9dd921..d4a3c91 100644
> > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-proc.c
> > @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ static int rtc_proc_show(struct seq_file *seq, void
> > *offset)
> >
> > err = rtc_read_alarm(rtc, &alrm);
> > if (err == 0) {
> > - seq_printf(seq, "alrm_time\t: ");
> > + seq_printf(seq, "alarm time\t: ");
> > if ((unsigned int)alrm.time.tm_hour <= 24)
> > seq_printf(seq, "%02d:", alrm.time.tm_hour);
> > else
> > @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static int rtc_proc_show(struct seq_file *seq, void
> > *offset)
> > else
> > seq_printf(seq, "**\n");
> >
> > - seq_printf(seq, "alrm_date\t: ");
> > + seq_printf(seq, "alarm date\t: ");
> > if ((unsigned int)alrm.time.tm_year <= 200)
> > seq_printf(seq, "%04d-", alrm.time.tm_year + 1900);
> > else
> > @@ -85,9 +85,9 @@ static int rtc_proc_show(struct seq_file *seq, void
> > *offset)
> > seq_printf(seq, "%02d\n", alrm.time.tm_mday);
> > else
> > seq_printf(seq, "**\n");
> > - seq_printf(seq, "alarm_IRQ\t: %s\n",
> > + seq_printf(seq, "alarm IRQ\t: %s\n",
> > alrm.enabled ? "yes" : "no");
> > - seq_printf(seq, "alrm_pending\t: %s\n",
> > + seq_printf(seq, "alarm pending\t: %s\n",
> > alrm.pending ? "yes" : "no");
> > seq_printf(seq, "update IRQ enabled\t: %s\n",
> > (rtc->uie_rtctimer.enabled) ? "yes" : "no");

--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

2018-12-10 10:03:04

by yuankuiz

Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: proc: printf using alarm for alrm

On 2018-12-07 04:38 AM, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 06/12/2018 15:22:51+0800, [email protected] wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Kindly, this format change formats the rtc dump from:
>> alrm_time : 00:00:00
>> alrm_date : 1970-01-01
>> alarm_IRQ : no
>> alrm_pending : no
>>
>> to:
>> alarm time : 00:00:00
>> alarm date : 1970-01-01
>> alarm IRQ : no
>> alarm pending : no
>>
>
> Yes, and this would break the ABI as this file is in procfs. This is
> not
> something I'm willing to do, especially since this file has been
> deprecated since 2006.

OK. So shall we default it as n like:
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/Kconfig b/drivers/rtc/Kconfig
index a819ef0..c51f0e1 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/rtc/Kconfig
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ config RTC_INTF_SYSFS
config RTC_INTF_PROC
bool "/proc/driver/rtc (procfs for rtcN)"
depends on PROC_FS
- default RTC_CLASS
+ default n
help
Say yes here if you want to use your system clock RTC through
the proc interface, /proc/driver/rtc.


Thanks,
BR//John Zhao