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/
