On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 00:14 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Daniel Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 23:56 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > changing the current 'timer' entry (which is line 2 of /proc/interrupts)
> > > to be 'listed as lapic-timer' and to 'replace it with the count from
> > > LOC' is faking a count in a line where nothing like that should be.
> >
> > This point is getting irrelevant ..
>
> it is very much relevant: faking a count is something we /dont/ want to
> do with /proc/interrupts, for (very) basic compatibility, simplicity and
> policy reasons. And that is precisely what your suggestion was to
> 'solve' this supposed 'problem' - so it's very much relevant.
As I said you are misunderstanding me .. which is why this is not
relevant any more ..
Please move on .
> > > the kernel simply displays reality: IRQ#0 isnt increasing because
> > > it's not used, and LOC (local apic timers) is increasing.
> >
> > What about the statistics for the other interrupts in the system ? It
> > clearly doesn't list all interrupts in the system .
>
> what is your point?
Isn't the listing inconsistent ? /proc/interrupts only showing some
special interrupts, and not others .. For example it shows NMI which is
not related to request_irq() .. It shows some clock driver devices
(timer, NMI, LOC) and not others (clock event devices) ..
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
