Re: [PATCH 2/3] proc: Export statistics for softirq to /proc

[Keika Kobayashi]

> > +/*
> > + * /proc/softirqs  ... display the number of softirqs
> > + */
> > +static int show_softirqs(struct seq_file *p, void *v)
> > +{
> > +	int i, j;
> > +
> > +	seq_printf(p, "                ");
> > +	for_each_online_cpu(i)
> > +		seq_printf(p, "CPU%-8d", i);
> > +	seq_printf(p, "\n");
> > +
> > +	for_each_softirq_nr(i) {
> > +		seq_printf(p, "%-10s", desc_array[i]);
> > +		for_each_online_cpu(j)
> > +			seq_printf(p, "%10u ", kstat_softirqs_cpu(i, j));
> > +		seq_printf(p, "\n");
> > +	}
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> 
> This uses for_each_online_cpu(), but below we use for_each_possible_cpu().
> 
> Shouldn't we be consistent here so that at least the numbers will add
> up to the same thing?
> 
> Probably for_each_possible_cpu() is best - people might want to see how
> many softirqs happened on a CPU which was recently offlined.

I understand this point. I'll fix it later.

There is same problem regarding /proc/interrupts.
Should we change from for_each_online_cpu() to for_each_possible_cpu(),
or is it too late?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/