Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:58:56 -0600 | From | Erik Jacobson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] seq_file version of /proc/interrupts |
| |
Hi there. I'm sorry it took me so long to test this. I was able to get some time on our 512p system this morning. I ran the test and your fix does solve this problem.
Actually, it was 511 processors at the time.
I was going to include the output but I decied most people wouldn't want to stretch their windows that wide. The output isn't pretty on a system with this many processors - but it isn't breaking and that is the main concern.
Thanks again for checking in to this. Much appreciated.
Erik
> > Here, anyway, is a better version of the patch. It's less intrusive, > > forgoes some "cleanups" I indulged in the first time, and makes it easier > > to update other architectures. I did x86-64, ia_64 and ppc64 just for the > > heck of it, but I can't test them. > > I tested your changes on a small ia64 Altix here. It worked well. I'll try > it out on a 512p system when I can get a time slot on it. > > Thanks for doing this. > > Erik > - > 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/ >
-- Erik Jacobson - Linux System Software - Silicon Graphics - Eagan, Minnesota - 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/
| |