Hi!
> > ...and btw it is nice to see if some activity happened on some
> > "unused" irq line: (If you are changing this, making it output unused
> > but active interrupts might be nice, too...)
>
> > 4: 5 XT-PIC
> > 5: 4 XT-PIC pcnet_cs
> > 6: 3 XT-PIC
>
> it's already possible to see unused IRQ stats in /proc/stat, and
It is well hidden in /proc/stat... (I did not know about that, ok.)
> /proc/interrupts is pretty long on bigger IO-APIC systems if all IRQ
> sources are listed. I'm not sure wether we want this.
It might alert people that non-listed interrupts are doing something
strange. And it should not be much bigger than it is now -- there
should not be much "active but currently not used" interrupts.
Pavel
-- I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care." Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents me at discuss@linmodems.org- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 15 2000 - 21:00:18 EST