From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751686AbYIXKSm (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Sep 2008 06:18:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754498AbYIXKSa (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Sep 2008 06:18:30 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:59563 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751915AbYIXKS3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Sep 2008 06:18:29 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:18:11 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Thomas Gleixner , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Should irq_chip->mask disable percpu interrupts to all cpus, or just to this cpu? Message-ID: <20080924101811.GC26267@elte.hu> References: <48D94B64.3070004@goop.org> <20080924084558.GD5576@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -0.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-0.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_20 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -0.5 BAYES_20 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 5 to 20% [score: 0.1609] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Other than the beautiful way we print things in /proc/interrupts > IRQ_PER_CPU feels like a really bad idea. Especially in that it > enshrines the nasty per cpu irq counters that scale horribly. ok - i thought the idea was to still have a per cpu irq desc. so lets fix /proc/interrupts in that model. Only a single entry for every class of interrupts or so? Ingo