On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 13:23 -0800, Daniel Walker wrote:
quoted text
> > we could make this clearer by renaming 'LOC' (which stands for 'LOCal 
> > timer interupts' and was added [and misnamed] by yours truly many moons 
> > ago) to 'apic-timer' and 'timer' to 'PIT-timer' but /that/ would be more 
> > of a userspace visible change than the change in the counter rates.
> 
> If we change the current "timer" entry to be listed as "lapic-timer" and
> not "IO-APIC-edge" (or one of the other names) and replace it with the
> count from LOC , that would make sense cause that field already changes
> depending if you have a io-apic or not ..

No. We are not fiddling with the IRQ subsystem statistics. IRQ subsystem
is unrelated to timers. And we do switch away from PIT if we have an
local apic timer, so the output of /proc/interrupt is just a mirror of
the real system and not some made up thing, which will make it harder to
debug real problems.

quoted text
> I think the regression (if you can call it that) is not scripts
> crashing, but more people not know what's going on with there system .. 

I did not hear a complaint of anyone except you. I doubt that there will
be a big confusion as long as the kernel does work as expected.

	tglx


-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/