* Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com> wrote:

quoted text
> 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.

quoted text
> > 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?

	Ingo
-
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/